The reasonableness of Christianity as delivered in the Scriptures

f

INF" .>'

THE

V I

REASONABLENESS

OP

CHRISTIANITY,

AS DELIVERED IN THE

SCRIPTURES.

BY

JOHN LOCKE, ESQ.

A NEW EDITION.

LONDON:

PRINTED FOR f. AND J. RIV1NGTON ; T. EGERTON ; J. CUTHELL ; J. AND
A. ARCH ; LONGMAN AND CO.; T. CADELL; J. RICHARDSON; .1. AND

\r. T. CLARKE; J. MAWMAN ; BAVNES AND SON; HARDING AND co. ;

BALDWIN AND CO. ; HARVEY AND DARTON ; R. SCHOLEY ; J. BOHV ;
J. COLLINGWOOD; T. TEGG ; G. AND W. B. WHITTAKER ; G. MACK IE ;
W. MASON; HURST, ROBINSON, AND CO.; J. HEARNE; J. BRUMBY;

SIMPKIN AND MARSHALL; s. PROWETT; w. PICKERING; n. SAUNDERS ;

J. PARKER, OXFORD ; AND STIRLING AND SLADE, EDINBURGH.

1824,

(O

C. Baldwin, Printer,
Bridge-street, London.

CONTENTS.

THE Reasonableness of Christianity as delivered in the

Scriptures » 1

A Vindication of the Reasonableness of Christianity, from

Mr. Edwards's Reflections 159

A second Vindication of the Reasonableness of Christia
nity 191

Index.

THE

REASONABLENESS

OF

CHRISTIANITY,

AS DELIVERED IN THE

SCRIPTURES

THE

PREFACE.

THE little satisfaction and consistency that is to be
found, in most of the systems of divinity I have met with,
made me betake myself to the sole reading of the scrip
tures (to which they all appeal) for the understanding
the Christian Religion. What from thence, by an at
tentive and unbiassed search, I have received, Reader,
I here deliver to thee. If by this my labour thou re-
ceivest any light, or confirmation in the truth, join with
me in thanks to the Father of lights, for his condescen
sion to our understandings. If upon a fair and un
prejudiced examination, thou findest I have mistaken
the sense and tenour of the Gospel, I beseech thee, as
a true Christian, in the spirit of the Gospel, (which is
that of charity,) and in the words of sobriety, set me
right, in the doctrine of salvation.

to 2

THE

REASONABLENESS

OF

CHRISTIANITY,

AS DELIVERED IN THE

SCRIPTURES.

IT is obvious to any one, who reads the New Testa
ment, that the doctrine of redemption, and conse
quently of the gospel, is founded upon the supposition
of Adam's fall. To understand, therefore, what we are
restored to by Jesus Christ, we must consider what the
scriptures show we lost by Adam. This I thought
worthy of a diligent and unbiassed search : since I found
the two extremes that men run into on this point,
either on the one hand shook the foundations of all
religion, or, on the other, made Christianity almost
nothing : for while some men would have all Adam's
posterity doomed to eternal, infinite punishment, for
the transgression of Adam, whom millions had never
heard of, and no one had authorised to transact for
him, or be his representative ; this seemed to others so
little consistent with the justice orj^oodness of the great

l

The Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 5

and infinite God, that they thought there was no re
demption necessary, and consequently, that there was
none ; rather than admit of it upon a supposition so
derogatory to the honour and attributes of that infinite
Being ; and so made Jesus Christ nothing but the re
storer and preacher of pure natural religion ; thereby
doing violence to the whole tenour of the New Testa
ment. And, indeed, both sides will be suspected to have
trespassed this way, against the written word of God,
by any one, who does but take it to be a collection of
writings, designed by God, for the instruction of the
illiterate bulk of mankind, in the way to salvation ;
and therefore, generally, and in necessary points, to
be understood in the plain direct meaning of the words
and phrases : such as they may be supposed to have had
in the mouths of the speakers, who used them accord
ing to the language of that time and country wherein
they lived ; without such learned, artificial, and forced
senses of them, as are sought out, and put upon them,
in most of the systems of divinity, according to the
notions that each one has been bred up in.

To one that, thus unbiassed, reads the scriptures,
what Adam fell from (is visible) was the state of per
fect obedience, which is called justice in the New Tes
tament ; though the word, which in the original sig
nifies justice, be translated righteousness : and by this
fail he lost paradise, wherein was tranquillity and the
tree of life; i. e. he lost bliss and immortality. The
penalty annexed to the breach of the law, with the sen
tence pronounced by God upon it, show this. The
penalty stands thus, Gen. ii. 17, " In the day that
" thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." How
was this executed ? He did eat : but, in the day he did
eat, he did not actually die ; but was turned out of pa
radise from the tree of life, and shut out for ever from
it, lest he should take thereof, and live for ever. This
shows, that the state of paradise was a state of immor
tality, of life without end ; which he lost that very day
that he eat : his life began from thence to shorten, and
waste, and to have an end ; and from thence to his ac
tual death, was but like the time of a prisoner, be-

6 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

tween the sentence passed, and the execution, which was
in view and certain. Death then entered, and showed
his face, which before was shut out, and riot known.
So St. Paul, Horn. v. 12, " By one man sin entered into
" the world, and death by sin ;" i. e. a state of death
and mortality : and, 1 Cor. xv. 22, " In Adam all die;"
i. e. by reason of his transgression, all men are mortal,
and come to die.

This is so clear in these cited places, and so much
the current of the New Testament, that nobody can
deny, but that the doctrine of the gospel is, that death
came on all men by Adam's sin ; only they differ about
the signification of the word death : for some will have
it to be a state of guilt, wherein not only he, but all his
posterity was so involved, that every one descended of
him deserved endless torment, in hell-fire. I shall say
nothing more here, how far, in the apprehensions of
men, this consists with the justice and goodness of God,
having mentioned it alxrye : but it seems a strange way
of understanding a law, which requires the plainest and
directest words, that by 'death should be meant eternal
life in misery. Could any one be supposed, by a law,
that says, " For felony thou shalt die ;" not that he
should lose his life ; but be kept alive in perpetual,
exquisite torments ? And would any one think himself
fairly dealt with, that was so used ?

To this, they would have it be also a state of necessary
sinning, and provoking God in every action that men
do : a yet harder sense of the word death than the other.
God says, that " in the day that thou eatest of the for-
" bidden fruit, thou shalt die ;" i. e. thou and thy
posterity shall be, ever after,, incapable of doing any
thing, but what shall be sinful and provoking to me
and shall justly deserve my wrath and indignation.
Could a worthy man be supposed to put such terms
upon the obedience of his subjects ? Much less can the
righteous God be supposed, as a punishment of one sin,
wherewith he is displeased, to put man under the ne
cessity of sinning continually, and so multiplying the
provocation. The reason of this strange interpretation,
we shall perhaps find, in some mistaken places of the

as delivered in the Scriptures. 7

New Testament. <JL must confess, by death here, I can
understand nothing but a ceasing to be, the losing of r
all actions of life and sense. Such a death came on
Adam, and all his posterity, by his first disobedience in
paradise ; under which death they should have lain for
ever, had it not been for the redemption by Jesus Christ/^
If by death, threatened to Adam, were meant the cor- ~~
ruption of human nature in his posterity, 'tis strange,
that the New Testament should not any-where take no
tice of it, and tell us, that corruption seized on all,
because of Adam's transgression, as well as it tells us
so of death. But, as I remember, every one's sin is
charged upon himself only.

Another part of the sentence was, " Cursed is the
" ground for thy sake : in sorrow shalt thou eat of it
" all the days of thy life ; in the sweat of thy face shall
" thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground ; for
" out of it wast thou taken ; dust thou art, and to dust
" shalt thou return," Gen. iii. 17 — 19. This shows,
that paradise was a place of bliss, as well as immorta
lity ; without drudgery, and without sorrow. But,
when man was turned out* he was exposed to the toil,
anxiety, and frailties of this mortal life, which should
end in the dust, out of which he was made, and to
which he should return ; and then have no more life or
sense, than the dust had, out of which he was made.

As Adam was turned out of paradise, so all his pos
terity were born out of it, out of the reach of the tree
of life ; all, like their father Adam, in a state of mor
tality, void of the tranquillity and bliss of paradise.
Rom. v. 12, " By one man sin entered into the world,
" and death by sin." But here will occur the common
objection, that so many stumble at: " How doth it
" consist with the justice and goodness of God, that
" the posterity of Adam should suffer for his sin ; the
" innocent be punished for the guilty ?" Very well, if
keeping one from what he has no right to, be called a
punishment; the state of immortality, in paradise, is
not due to the posterity of Adam, more than to any
other creature. Nay, if God afford them a temporary,
mortal life, 'tis his gift; they owe it to his bounty;

8 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

they could not claim it as their right, nor does he
injure them when he takes it from them. Had he
taken from mankind any thing that was their right, or
did he put men in a state of misery, worse than not
being, without any fault or demerit of their own ; this,
indeed, would be hard to reconcile with the notion we
have of justice ; and much more with the goodness, and
other attributes of the supreme Being, which he has de
clared of himself; and reason, as well as revelation,
must acknowledge to be in him ; unless we will con
found good and evil, God and Satan. That such a
state of extreme, irremediable torment is worse than
no being at all ; if every one's own sense did not deter
mine against the vain philosophy, and foolish metaphy
sics of some men; yet our Saviour's peremptory de
cision, Matt. xxvi. 24, has put it past doubt, that one
may be in such an estate, that it had been better for him
not to have been born. But that such a temporary life,
as we now have, with all its frailties and ordinary mi
series, is better than no being, is evident, by the high
value we put upon it ourselves. £And therefore, though
all die in Adam, yet none are truly punished, but for
their own deeds. J Rom. ii. 6, " God will render to
" every one," How? " According to his deeds. To
" those that obey unrighteousness, indignation and
" wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of
" man that doth evil," ver. 9. 2 Cor. v. 10, " We
" must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that
" every one may receive the things done in his body,
" according to that he has done, whether it be good or
" bad." ) And Christ himself, who knew for what he
should condemn men at the last day, assures us, in the
two places, where he describes his proceeding at the
great judgment, that the sentence of condemnation
passes only upon the workers of iniquity, such as neg
lected to fulfil the law in acts of charity, Matt. vii.
23, Luke xiii. 27, Matt. xxv. 41, 42, &c. "And
6 again, John v. 29, our Saviour tells the jews, that
* all shall come forth of their graves, they that have
' done good to the resurrection of life ; and they that
" have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation,"

as delivered in the Scriptures. 9

But here is no condemnation of any one, for what his
fore-father Adam had done ; which it is not likely should
have been omitted, if that should have been a cause
why any one was adjudged to the fire, with the devil
and his angels. And he tells his disciples, that when
he comes again with his angels, in the glory of his
Father, that then he will render to every one according
to his works, Matt. xvi. 27.

Adam being thus turned out of paradise, and all his
posterity born out of it, the consequence of it was, that
all men should die, and remain under death for ever,
and so be utterly lost.

From this estate of death, Jesus Christ restores all
mankind to life ; 1 Cor. xv. 22, " As in Adam all die,
" so in Christ shall all be made alive." How this shall
be, the same apostle tells us in the foregoing ver. 21.
" By man death came, by man also came the resurrec-
" tion from the dead." Whereby it appears, that the
life, which Jesus Christ restores to all men, is that life,
which they receive again at the resurrection. Then they
recover from death, which otherwise all mankind should
have continued under, lost for ever; as appears by St.
Paul's arguing, 1 Cor. xv. concerning the resurrection.
flXnd thus men are, by the second Adam, restored to
life again ; that so by Adam's sin they may none of them
lose any thing, which by their own righteousness they ^ c
might have a title to :Qfor righteousness, or an exact 1 '
obedience to the law, sdems, by the scripture, to have
a claim of right to eternal life, /Rom. iv. 4. " To him
" that worketh," i. e. does tffe works of the law, " is
" the reward not reckoned of grace, but of DEBT."
And Rev. xxii. 14, "Blessed are they who do his com-
" mandments, that they may HAVE RIGHT to the tree
" of life, which is in the paradise of God.'L If any of
the posterity of Adam were just, they shall not lose the
reward of it, eternal life and bliss, by being his mortal v7
issue : Christ will bring them all to life again ; and then
they shall be put every one upon his own trial, and re
ceive judgment, as he is found to be righteous, or not.
And the righteous, as our Saviour says, Matt. xxv. 46,
shall go into eternal life. Nor shall any one miss it, who

10 The Reasonableness of Christianity ',

has done, what our Saviour directed the lawyer, who
asked, Luke x. 25, What he should do to inherit eternal
life ? " Do this," i. e. what is required by the law,
" and thou shalt live."

On the other side, it seems the unalterable purpose of
the divine justice, that no unrighteous person, no one
that is guilty of any breach of the law, should be in pa
radise : but that the wages of sin should be to every
man, as it was to Adam, an exclusion of him out of
that happy state of immortality, and bring death upon
him. And this is so conformable to the eternal and
established law of right and wrong, that it is spoken of
too, as if it could not be otherwise. St. James says,
chap. i. 15, " Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth
" death," as it were, by a natural and necessary pro
duction. " Sin entered into the world, and death by
« sin," says St. Paul, Rom. v. 12 : and vi. 23, " The
" wages of sin is death." Death is the purchase of
any, of every sin. Gal. iii. 10, " Cursed is every one,
" who continueth not in all things which are written
" in the book of the law to do them." And of this St.
James gives a reason, chap. ii. 10, 11, " Whosoever
" shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point,
" he is guilty of all: for he that said, Do not commit
" adultery, said also, Do not kill :" i. e. he that offends
in any one point, sins against the authority which esta
blished the law.

Here then we have the standing and fixed measures
of life and death. Immortality and bliss, belong to the
righteous ; those who have lived in an exact conformity
to the law of God, are out of the reach of death ; but
an exclusion from paradise and loss of immortality is the
portion of sinners ; of all those who have any way broke
that law, and failed of a complete obedience to it, by
the guilt of any one transgression. And thus mankind
by the law are put upon the issues of life or death,
as they are righteous or unrighteous, just, or unjust ;
i. e. exact performers or transgressors of the law.

But yet, " all having sinned," Rom. iii. 23, " and
" come short of the glory of God," i. e. the kingdom
of God in heaven, (which is often called his glory,)

as delivered in the Scriptures. 11

" both jews and gentiles;" ver. 22, so that, " by the
" deeds of the law," no one could be justified, ver. 20,
it follows, that no one could then have eternal life and
bliss.

Perhaps, it will be demanded, " Why did God give
" so hard a law to mankind, that to the apostle's time
" no one of Adam's issue had kept it? As appears by
" Rom. iii. and Gal. iii. 21, 22."

Answ. It was such a law as the purity of God's na
ture required, and must be the law of such a creature
as man ; unless God would have made him a rational
creature, and not required him to have lived by the
law of reason ; but would have countenanced in him
irregularity and disobedience to that light which he had,
and that rule which was suitable to his nature ; which
would have been to have authorised disorder, confu
sion, and wickedness in his creatures rufor that this law 4^-
was the law of reason, or as it is called, of nature ; we
shall see by and by : and if rational creatures will not $
live up to the rule of their reason, who shall excuse
them ? _}If you will admit them to forsake reason in one
point, why not in another ? Where will you stop ? To
disobey God in any part of his commands, (and 'tis
he that commands what reason does,) is direct rebellion ;
which, if dispensed with in any point, government and
order are at an end ; and there can be no bounds set
to the lawless exorbitancy of unconfined man. The
law therefore was, as St. Paul tells us, Rom. viil 12,
" holy, just, and good," and such as it ought, and could
not otherwise be.

This then being the case, that whoever is guilty of
any sin should certainly die, and cease to be ; the be
nefit of life, restored by Christ at the resurrection,
would have been no great advantage, (for as much as,
here again, death must have seized upon all mankind,
because all have sinned ; for the wages of sin is every
where death, as well after as before the resurrection,) if
God had not found out a way to justify some, i. e. so
many as obeyed another law, which God gave ; which
in the New Testament is called " the law of faith,"
Rom. iii. 27, and is opposed to " the law of works."

] 2 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

And therefore the punishment of those who would not
follow him, was to lose their souls, i. e. their lives,
Mark viii. 35 — 38, as is plain, considering the occasion
it was spoke on.

The hetter to understand the law of faith, it will he
convenient, in the first place, to consider the law of
works. The law of works then, in short, is that law
which requires perfect obedience, without any remis
sion or abatement ; so that, by that law, a man cannot
be just, or justified, without an exact performance of
every tittle. Such a perfect obedience, in the New
Testament, is termed ^xatoo-J^, which we translate
righteousness.

The language of this law is, " Do this and live,
" transgress and die." Lev. xviii. 5, "Ye shall keep
" my statutes and my judgments, which if a man do,
" he shall live in them." Ezek. xx. 11, " I gave
" them my statutes, and showed them my judgments,
" which if a man do, he shall even live in them.
" Moses, says St. Paul, Rom. x. 5, describeth the
" righteousness, which is of the law, that the man,
" which doth these things, shall live in them." Gal.
iii. 12. " The law is not of faith ; but that man, that
" doth them, shall live in them." On the other side,
transgress and die ; no dispensation, no atonement. Ver-
10, " Cursed is every one that continueth not in all
" things which are written in the book of the law to do
" them."

Where this law of works was to be found, the New
Testament tells us, viz. in the law delivered by Moses,
John i. 17, " The law was given by Moses, but grace
" and truth came by Jesus Christ." Chap. vii. 19,
" Did not Moses give you the law ?" says our Saviour,
" and yet none of you keep the law." And this is the
law, which he speaks of, where he asks the lawyer,
Luke x. 26, " What is written in the law ? How readest
" thou ? ver. 28, This do, and thou shalt live." This
is that which St. Paul so often styles the law, without
any other distinction, Rom. ii. 13, " Not the hearers
" of the law are just before God, but the doers of the
" law are justified." 'Tis needless to quote any more

as delivered in the Scriptures. 13

places ; his epistles are full of it, especially this of the
Romans.

" But the law given by Moses, being not given to
" all mankind, how are all men sinners ; since, with-
" out a law, there is no transgression ?" To this the
apostle, ver. 14, answers, " For when the gentiles,
" which have not the law, do (i. e. find it reasonable
" to do) by nature the things contained in the law;
" these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves ;
" which show the work of the law written in their
" hearts ; their consciences also bearing witness, and
" amongst themselves their thoughts accusing or ex-
" cusing one another." By which, and other places in
the following chapter, 'tis plain, that under the law of
works, is comprehended also the law of nature, know-
able by reason, as well as the law given by Moses. For,
says St. Paul, Rom. iii. 9, 23, " We have proved both
" jews and gentiles, that they are all under sin : for all
" have sinned, and come short of the glory of God :"
which they could not do without a law.

Nay, whatever God requires any- where to be done,
without making any allowance for faith, that is a part
of the law of works : so that forbidding Adam to eat of
the tree of knowledge was part of the law of works.
Only we must take notice here, that some of God's
positive commands, being for peculiar ends, and suited
to particular circumstances of times, places, and per
sons ; have a limited and only temporary obligation by
virtue of God's positive injunction ; such as was that
part of Moses's law, which concerned the outward
worship or political constitution of the jews ; and is
called the ceremonial and judicial law, in contradistinc
tion to the moral part of it ; which being conformable
to the eternal law of right, is of eternal obligation ; and
therefore remains in force still, under the gospel ; nor
is abrogated by the law of faith, as St. Paul found
some ready to infer, Rom. iii. 31, "Do we then make
" void the law, through faith ? God forbid ; yea we
" establish the law."

Nor can it be otherwise : for, were there no law of
works, there could be no law of faith. For there could

14 The Reasonableness of Christianity >

be no need of faith, which should be counted to men
for righteousness ; if there were no law, to be the rule
and measure of righteousness, which men failed in their
obedience to. Where there is no law, there is no sin ;
all are righteous equally, with or without faith.

The rule, therefore, of right, is the same that ever
it was ; the obligation to observe it is also the same :
the difference between the law of works, and the law of
faith/ is only this : that the law of works makes no al
lowance for failing on any occasion, j Those that obey
are righteous ; those that in any part disobey, are un
righteous, and must not expect life, the reward of righ
teousness. But, by the law of faith, faith is allowed to
supply the defect of full obedience : and so the be
lievers are admitted to life and immortality, as if they
were righteous. Only here we must take notice, that
when St. Paul sa^s, that the gospel establishes the law,
he means the moral part of the law of Moses ; for that
he could not mean the ceremonial, or political part of
it, is evident, by what I quoted out of him just now,
where he says, That the gentiles do, by nature, the
things contained in the law,, their consciences bearing
witness. For the gentiles neither did, nor thought of,
the judicial or ceremonial institutions of Moses ; 'twas
only the moral part their consciences were concerned
in. As for the rest, St. Paul tells the Galatians, chap,
iv. they are not under that part of the law, which ver.
3, he calls elements of the world ; and ver. 9, weak and
beggarly elements. And our Saviour himself, in this
gospel sermon on the mount, tells them. Matt. v. 17,
That, whatever they might think, he was not come to
dissolve the law, but to make it more full and strict :
for that which is meant by?rA»jpwo-at is evident from the
following part of that chapter, where he gives the pre
cepts in a stricter sense, than they were received in be
fore. But they are all precepts of the moral law, which
he re-inforces. What should become of the ritual law,
he tells the woman of Samaria, in these words, John iv.
21, 23, " The hour cometh. when you shall, neither in
" this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the
" Father. But the true worshippers shall worship the

as delivered in the Scriptures. 15

" Father in spirit and in truth ; for the Father seeketh
" such to worship him."

Thus then, as to the law, in short : the civil and
ritual part of the law, delivered by Moses, obliges not
Christians, thowgh, to the jews, it were a part of the
law of works; it being a part of the law of nature, that
man ought to obey every positive law of God, whenever
he shall please to make any such addition to the law of
his nature. But the moral part of Moses's law, or
the moral law, (which is every- where the same, the
eternal rule of right,) obliges Christians, and all men,
every-where, and is ^to all men the standing law of
works. But Christian believers have the privilege to be
under the law of faith too ; which is that law, whereby
God justifies a man for believing, though by his works
he be not just or righteous, i. e. though he come short
of perfect obedience to the law of works. iQod alone
does or can justify, or make just, those who by their
works are not so : which he doth, by counting their
faith for righteousness, I. e. for a complete performance
of the law. Rom. iv. 3, " Abraham believed God, and
" it was counted to him for righteousness." Ver. 5,
" To him that believeth on him that justifieth the un-
" godly, his faith is counted for righteousness." Ver. 6,
" Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the
" man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without
" works ;" i. e. without a full measure of works, which
is exact obedience. Ver. 7, Saying, " Blessed are they
" whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are co-
" vered." Ver. 8, " Blessed is the man, to whom the
" Lord will not impute sin."

This faith, for which God justified Abraham, what
was it ? It was the believing God, when he engaged his
promise in the covenant he made with him. This will
be plain to any one, who considers these places toge
ther, Gen. xv. 6, " He believed in the Lord,, or be-
" lieved the Lord." For that the Hebrew phrase,
" believing in," signifies no more but believing, is
plain from St. Paul's citation of this place, Rom. iv. 3,
where he repeats it thus : " Abraham believed God,"

16 The Reasonablesness of Christianity,

which he thus explains, ver. 18 — 22, " Who against
" hope believed in hope, that he might become the fa-
" ther of many nations : according to that which was
" spoken, So shall thy seed be. And, being not weak
" in faith, he considered not his own body now dead,
" when he was about an hundred years old, nor yet the
" deadness of Sarah's womb. He staggered not at the
" promise of God, through unbelief ; but was strong
" in faith giving glory to God. And being fully per-
" suaded, that what he had promised he was also able to
" perform. And therefore it was imputed to him for
" righteousness." By which it is clear, that the faith
which God counted to Abraham for righteousness, was
nothing but a firm belief of what God declared to him ;
and a steadfast relying on him, for the accomplishment
of what he had promised.

" Now this," says St. Paul, ver. 23, 24, * was not
" writ for his [Abraham's] sake alone, but for us also ;"
teaching us, that as Abraham was justified for his faith,
so also ours shall be accounted to us for righteousness,
if we believe God, as Abraham believed him. Whereby
it is plain is meant the firmness of our faith, without
staggering, and not the believing the same propositions
that Abraham believed ; viz. that though he and Sarah
were old, and past the time and hopes of children, yet
he should have a son by her, and by him become the
father of a great people, which should possess the land
of Canaan. This was what Abraham believed, and
was counted to him for righteousness. But nobody, I
think, will say, that any one's believing this now, shall
be imputed to him for righteousness. wThe law of faith
then, in short, is for every one to believe what God re
quires him to believe, as a condition of the covenant he
makes with him : and not to doubt of the performance
of his promises^ This the apostle intimates in the close
here, ver. 24, *7But for us also, to whom it shall be
" imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus
" our Lord from the dead." We must, therefore, ex
amine and see what God requires us to believe now,
under the revelation of the gospel ; for the belief of

as delivered in the Scriptures. 17

invisible, eternal, omnipotent God, maker of heaven
and earth, &c. was required before, as well as now.

What we are now required to believe to obtain eter
nal life, is plainly set down in the gospel. St. John
tells us, John iii. 36, " He that believeth on the Son,
" hath eternal life ; and he that believeth not the Son,
" shall not see life." What this believing on him is,
we are also told in the next chapter : " The woman
" said unto him, I know that the Messiah cometh:
" when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus
" saith unto her, I that speak unto thee, am he. The
" woman then went into the city, and saith to the men,
" come see a man that hath told me all things that
" ever I did : is not this the Messiah ? and many of the
" Samaritans believed on him for the saying of the
" woman, who testified, he told me all that ever I did.
" So when the Samaritans were come unto him, many
" more believed because of his words, and said to the
" woman. We believe not any longer, because of thy
" saying ; for we have heard ourselves, and we know
" that this man is truly the Saviour of the world, the
"JMessiah." John iv. 25, 26, 29, 39, 40, 41, 42.
j_ By which place it is plain, that believing on the Son
i!T the believing that Jesus was the Messiah ; giving
credit to the miracles he did, and the profession he
made of himself. / For those who are said to BELIEVE
ON HIM, for the laying of the woman, ver. 39, tell the
woman that they now believed not any longer, because
of her saying : but that having heard him themselves,
they knew, i. e. BELIEVED, past doubt, THAT HE WAS
THE MESSIAH.

This was the great proposition that was then con
troverted, concerning Jesus of Nazareth, " Whether he
" was the Messiah or no ? " And the assent to that was
that which distinguished believers from unbelievers.
When many of his disciples had forsaken him, upon
his declaring that he was the bread of life, which came
down from heaven, " He said to his apostles, Will ye
" also go away ? " Then Simon Peter answered him,
" Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of
* eternal life. And we believe, and are sure, that

c

18 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living God,"
John vi. 69. This was the faith which distinguished
them from apostates and unbelievers, and was sufficient
to continue them in the rank of apostles : and it was
upon the same proposition, " That Jesus was the Mes-
" siah, the Son of the living God," owned by St. Peter,
that our Saviour said, he would build his church, Matt,
xvi. 16—18.

To convince men of this, he did his miracles : and
their assent to, or not assenting to this, made them
to be, or not to be, of his church ; believers, or not
believers : " The jews came round about him, and
" said unto him, How long dost thou make us doubt?
" If thou be the Messiah, tell us plainly. Jesus an-
" swered them, I told you, and ye believed not : the
" works that I do in my Father's name, they bear
" witness of me. But ye believe not, because ye are
" not of my sheep," John x. 24 — 26. Conformable
hereunto, St. John tells us, that " many deceivers are
" entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus,
" the Messiah, is come in the flesh. This is a de-
" ceiver and an antichrist ; whosoever abideth not in
" the doctrine of the Messiah, has not God. He that
" abideth in the doctrine of the Messiah," i. e. that
Jesus is he, " hath both the Father and the Son,"
% John 7, 9. That this is the meaning of the place, is
plain from what he says in his foregoing epistle, " Who-
" soever believeth that Jesus is the Messiah, is born
" of God," 1 John v. ] . And therefore, drawing to a
close of his gospel, and showing the end for which he
writ it, he has these words : " Many other signs truly
" did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are
" not written in this book : but these are written that
" ye may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of
" God ; and that believing, you might have life
" through his name/* John xx. 30, 31. Whereby it
is plain, that the gospel was writ to induce men into a
belief of this proposition, "That Jesus of Nazareth was
" the Messiah ; " which if they believed, they should
have life.

as delivered in the Scriptures. 19

Accordingly the great question among the jews was,
whether he were the Messiah or no? and the great
point insisted on and promulgated in the gospel, was,
that he was the Messiah. The first glad tidings of his
birth, brought to the shepherds by an angel, was in
these words : " Fear not : for, behold, I bring you
" good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all
" people : for to you is born this day, in the city of
" David, a Saviour, who is the Messiah, the Lord,"
Luke ii. 11. Our Saviour discoursing with Martha
about the means of attaining eternal life, saith to her,
John xi. 27, " Whosoever believeth in me, shall never
" die. Believest thou this ? She saith unto him, Yea,
" Lord, I believe that thou art the Messiah, the Son of
" God, which should come into the world." This
answer of hers showeth, what it is to believe in Jesus
Christ, so as to have eternal life ; viz. to believe that
he is the Messiah, the son of God, whose coming was
foretold by the prophets. And thus Andrew and Philip
express it : Andrew says to his brother Simon, " we have
" found the Messiah, which is, being interpreted, the
" Christ. Philip saith to Nathanael, we have found
" him, of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did
" write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph/' John
i. 41, 45. According to what the evangelist says in
this place, I have, for the clearer understanding of the
scripture, all along put Messiah for Christ : Christ be
ing but the Greek name for the Hebrew Messiah, and
both signifying the Anointed.

And that he Was the Messiah, was the great truth he
took pains to convince his disciples and apostles of;
appearing to them after his resurrection : as may be
seen, Luke xxiv. which we shall more particularly con
sider in another place. There we read what gospel our
Saviour preached to his disciples and apostles ; and that
as soon as he was risen from the dead, twice, the very
day of his resurrection.

And, if we may gather what was to be believed by
all nations from what was preached unto them, we may
certainly know what they were commanded, Matt. ult.
to teach all nations, by what they actually did teach all

c 2

20 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

nations. We may observe, that the preaching of the
apostles every-where in the Acts, tended to this one
point, to prove that Jesus was the Messiah. Indeed,
now, after his death, his resurrection was also commonly
required to be believed, as a necessary article, and some
times solely insisted on : it being a mark and undoubted
evidence of his being the Messiah, and necessary now
to be believed by those who would receive him as the
Messiah. For since the Messiah was to be a Saviour
and a king, and to give life and a kingdom to those
who received him, as we shall see by and by; there
could have been no pretence to have given him out for
the Messiah, and to require men to believe him to be
so, who thought him under the power of death, and cor
ruption of the grave. And therefore those who believed
him to be the Messiah, must believe that he was risen
from the dead : and those who believed him to be risen
from the dead, could not doubt of his being the Messiah.
But of this more in another place.

Let us see therefore, how the apostles preached Christ,
and what they proposed to their hearers to believe. St.
Peter at Jerusalem, Acts ii. by his first sermon, convert
ed three thousand souls. What was his word, which,
as we are told, ver. 41, "they gladly received, and
" thereupon were baptized ? " That may be seen from
ver. 22 to 36. In short, this ; which is the conclusion,
drawn from all that he had said, and which he presses
on them, as the thing they were to believe, viz. " There-
" fore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that
" God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have cru-
" cified, Lord and Messiah," ver. 36.

To the same purpose was his discourse to the jews,
in the temple, Acts iii. the design whereof you have,
ver. 18. " But those things that God before had showed,
" by the mouth of all his prophets, that the Messiah
" should suffer, he hath so fulfilled."

In the next chapter, Acts iv> Peter and John being
examined, about the miracle on the lame man, profess
it to have been done in the name of Jesus of Nazareth,
who was the Messiah, in whom alone there was salva
tion, ver. 10 — 12, The same thing they confirm to

as delivered in the Scriptures. 21

them again, Acts v. 29 — 32. "And daily in the temple,
" and in every house, they ceased not to teach and
" preach Jesus the Messiah," ver, 42.

What was Stephen's speech to the council, Acts vii.
but a reprehension to them that they were the betrayers
and murderers of the Just One ? Which is the title, by
which he plainly designs the Messiah whose coming
was foreshown by the prophets, ver. 51, 52. And that
the Messiah was to be without sin, (which is the import
of the word Just,) was the opinion of the jews, appears
from John ix. ver. 22, compared with 24.

Act viii. Philip carries the gospel to Samaria : " Then
" Philip went down to Samaria, and preached to them."
What was it he preached ? You have an account of it
in this one word, " the Messiah," ver. 5. This being
that alone which was required of them, to believe that
Jesus was the Messiah ; which when they believed they
were baptized. " And when they believed Philip's
" preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and
" the name of Jesus the Messiah, they were baptized,
" both men and women/' ver. 12.

Philip being sent from thence by a special call of
the Spirit, to make an eminent convert ; out of Isaiah
preaches to him Jesus, ver. 35. And what it was he
preached concerning Jesus, we may know by the pro
fession of faith the eunuch made, upon which he was
admitted to baptism, ver. 37. "I believe that Jesus
" Christ is the Son of God : " which is as much as to
say, I believe that he, whom you call Jesus Christ, is
really and truly the Messiah, that was promised. For,
that believing him to be the Son of God, and to be the
Messiah, was the same thing, may appear, by compar
ing John i. 45, with ver. 49, where Nathanael owns
Jesus to be the Messiah, in these terms : " Thou art
" the Son of God ; thou art the king of Israel." So
the jews, Luke xxii. 70, asking Christ, whether he
were the Son of God, plainly demanded of him, whether
he were the Messiah ? Which is evident, by comparing
that with the three preceding verses. They ask him,
ver. 67, Whether he were the Messiah ? He answers,
" If I tell you, you will noi believe : " but withal tells

22 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

them, that from thenceforth he should be in possession of
the kingdom of the Messiah, expressed in these words,
ver. 69. " Hereafter shall the Son of Man sit on the
" right hand of the power of God : " which made them
all cry out, " Art thou then the Son of God ? " i. e. Dost
thou then own thyself to be the Messiah ? To which he
replies, " Ye say that I am." That the Son of God
was the known title of the Messiah at that time,
amongst the jews, we may see also from what the jews
say to Pilate, John xix. 7. " We have a law, and by
" our law he ought to die, because he made himself
" THE SON OF GOD ; " i. e. by making himself the
Messiah, the prophet which was to come, but falsely ;
and therefore he deserves to die by the law, Dent, xviii.
20. That this was the common signification of the
Son of God, is farther evident, from what the chief
priests, mocking him, said, when he was on the cross,
Matt, xxvii. 42. " He saved others, himself he cannot
" save : if he be the king of Israel, let him now come
" down from the cross, and we will believe him. He
" trusted in God, let him deliver him now, if he will
" have him ; for he said, I am the SON OF GOD ; " i. e.
He said, he was the Messiah : but 'tis plainly false ;
for, if he were, God would deliver him : for the Messiah
is to be king of Israel, the Saviour of others ; but this
man cannot save himself. The chief priests mention
here the two titles, then in use, whereby the jews
commonly designed the Messiah, viz. " Son of God,
« and king of Israel." That of Son of God was so
familiar a compellation of the Messiah, who was then
so much expected and talked of, that the Romans, it
seems, who lived amongst them, had learned it, as
appears from ver. 54. " Now when the centurion and
" they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the
" earthquake, and those things that were done, they
" feared greatly, saying, truly this was the SON OF
" GOD ; " this was that extraordinary person that was
looked for.

Acts ix. St. Paul, exercising the commission to preach
the gospel, which he had received in a miraculous way,
ver. 20. " Straitway preached Christ in the synagogues,

as delivered in the Scriptures. 23

ec that he is the Son of God ; " i. e. that Jesus was the
Messiah : for Christ, in this place, is evidently a proper
name. And that this was it, which Paul preached,
appears from ver. 22. " Saul increased the more in
" strength, and confounded the jews, who dwelt in
" Damascus, proving that this is the very Christ," i. e.
the Messiah.

Peter, when he came to Cornelius at Caesarea, who,
by a vision, was ordered to send for him, as St. Peter
on the other side was by a vision commanded to go to
him ; what does he teach him ? His whole discourse,
Acts x. tends to show what, he says, God commanded
the apostles, " To preach unto the people, and to
" testify, that it is he £ Jesus] which was ordained of
" God to be the judge of the quick and the dead.
" And that it was to him, that all the prophets give
" witness, that, through his name, whosoever believ-
" eth in him, shall have remission of sins," ver. 42, 43.
" This is the word, which God sent to the children of
" Israel ; that WORD, which was published throughout
" all Judea, and began from Galilee, after the bap-
" tism which John preached," ver. 36, 37. And these
are the words, which had been promised to Cornelius,
Acts xi. 14, " Whereby he and all his house should be
" saved : " which words amount only to thus much :
that Jesus was the Messiah, the Saviour that was pro
mised. Upon their receiving of this, (for this was all
was taught them,) the Holy Ghost fell on them, and
they were baptized. 'Tis observable here, that the
Holy Ghost fell on them, before they were baptized,
which, in other places, converts received not till after
baptism. The reason whereof seems to be this, that
God, by bestowing on them the Holy Ghost, did thus
declare from Heaven, that the gentiles, upon believing
Jesus to be the Messiah, ought to be admitted into the
church by baptism, as well as the jews. Whoever reads
St. Peter's defence, Acts xi. when he was accused by
those of the circumcision, that he had not kept that
distance, which he ought, with the uncircumcised, will
be of this opinion ; and see by what he says, ver. 15, 16,
17, that this was the ground, and an irresistible autho-

24 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

rity to him for doing so strange a thing, as it appeared
to the jews, (who alone yet were members of the Chris
tian church,) to admit gentiles into their communion,
upon their believing. And therefore St. Peter, in the
foregoing chapter, Acts x. before he would baptize
them, proposes this question, " to those of the circum*
" cision, which came with him, and were astonished,
" because that on the gentiles also was poured out the
" gift of the Holy Ghost : can any one forbid water, that
" these should not be baptized, who have received the
" Holy Ghost as well as we ? " ver. 47. And when some
of the sect of the pharisees, who believed, thought it need
ful that the converted gentiles should be circumcised
and keep the law of Moses, Acts xv. " Peter rose up
" and said unto them, men and brethren, you know that
" a good while ago God made choice amongst us, that
" the gentiles/5 viz. Cornelius, and those here converted
with him, " by my mouth should hear the gospel and
" believe. And God, who knoweth the hearts, bare
u them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as
" he did unto us, and put no difference between us and
" them, purifying their hearts by faith," v. 7 — 9- So that
both jews and gentiles, who believed Jesus to be the
Messiah, received thereupon the seal of baptism ; where
by they were owned to be his, and distinguished from
unbelievers. From what is above said, we may observe
that this preaching Jesus to be the Messiah is called
the Word, and the Word of God : and believing it,
receiving the Word of God. Vid. Acts x. 36, 37. and
xi. 1, 19, 20. and the word of the gospel, Acts xv. 7.
And so likewise in the history of the gospel, what Mark,
chap. iv. 14, 15, calls simply the word, St. Luke calls
the word of God, Luke viii. 11. And St. Matthew,
chap. xiii. 19, the word of the kingdom ; which were,
it seems, in the gospel-writers synonymous terms, and
are so to be understood by us.

But to go on : Acts xiii. Paul preaches in the syna
gogue at Antioch, where he makes it his business to
convince the jews, that " God, according to his pro-
" mise, had of the seed of David raised to Israel a Sa-
" viour Jesus.1' v. 24, That he was He of whom the pro-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 25

phets writ, v. 25 — 29, i. e. the Messiah : and that, as
a demonstration of his being so, God had raised him
from the dead, v. 30. From whence he argues thus,
v. 32, 33. We evangelize to you, or bring you this
gospel, " how that the promise which was made to our
" fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us, in that he
" hath raised Jesus again ; " as it is also written in the
second psalm, " Thou art my Son, this day I have be-
" gotten thee." And having gone on to prove him to be
the Messiah, by his resurrection from the dead, he makes
this conclusion, v. 38, 39. " Be it known unto you,
" therefore, men and brethren, that through this man
" is preached unto you forgiveness of sins ; and by him
" all who believe are justified from all things, from
" which they could not be justified by the law of Moses."
This is in this chapter called " the Word of God," over
and over again : compare v. 42, with 44, 46, 48, 49, and
chap. xii. v. 24.

Acts xvii. 2 — 4. At Thessalonica, " Paul, as his
" manner was, went into the synagogue, and three sab-
" bath days reasoned with the jews out of the scriptures ;
" opening and alleging, that the Messiah must needs
" have suffered, and risen again from the dead : and that
" this Jesus, whom I preach unto you. is the Messiah.
" And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul
" and Silas : but the jews which believed not, set the
" city in an uproar." Can there be any thing plainer,
than that the assenting to this proposition, that Jesus
was the Messiah, was that which distinguished the be
lievers from the unbelievers ? For this was that alone,
which, three sabbaths, Paul endeavoured to convince
them of, as the text tells us in direct words.

From thence he went to Berrea, and preached the
same thing: and the Berreans are commended, v. 11,
for searching the scriptures, whether those things, i. e,
which he had said, v. 2, 3, concerning Jesus's being
the Messiah, were true or no.

The same doctrine we find him preaching at Corinth,
Acts xviii. 4 — 6. " And he reasoned in the synagogue
" every sabbath, and persuaded the jews and the Greeks.
" And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Mace-

26 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" donia, Paul was pressed in spirit, and testified to the
" jews, that Jesus was the Messiah. And when they
" opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his rai-
" ment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your
" own heads, I am clean ; from henceforth I will go
" unto the Greeks."

Upon the like occasion he tells the jews at Antioch,
Acts xiii. 46, " It was necessary that the word of God
" should first have been spoken to you ; but seeing you
" put it off from you, we turn to the gentiles." 'Tis plain
here, St. Paul's charging their blood on their own heads,
is for opposing this single truth, that Jesus was the
Messiah ; that salvation or perdition depends upon be
lieving or rejecting this one proposition. I mean, this
is all that is required to be believed by those who ac
knowledge but one eternal and invisible God, the maker
of heaven and earth, as the jews did. For that there is
something more required to salvation, besides believing,
we shall see hereafter. In the mean time, it is fit here
on this occasion to take notice, that though the apostles
in their preaching to the jews, and the devout, (as we
translate the word r&optvoi, who were proselytes of the
gate, and the worshippers of one eternal and invisible
God,) said nothing of the believing in this one true God,
the maker of heaven and earth ; because it was needless
to press this to those who believed and professed it al
ready (for to such, 'tis plain, were most of their dis
courses hitherto.) JYet when they had to do with ido
latrous heathens, who were not yet come to the know
ledge of the one only true God ; they began with that,
as necessary to be believed ; it being the foundation on
which the other was built, and without which it could
signify nothing.

Thus Paul speaking to the idolatrous Lystrians, who
would have sacrificed to him and Barnabas, says, Acts
xiv. 15, " We preach unto you, that ye should turn
" from these vanities unto the living God, who made
" heaven and earth, and the sea, and all things that are
" therein : who in times past suffered all nations to walk
" in their own ways. Nevertheless he left not himself
" without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain

as delivered in the Scriptures. 27

" from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts
" with food and gladness."

Thus also he proceeded with the idolatrous Athenians,
Acts xvii. telling them, upon occasion of the altar, dedi
cated to the unknown God, " whom you ignorantly
" worship, him declare I unto you. God who made the
" world, and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of
u heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with
" hands. — Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God,
" we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto
" gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art, or man's device.
" And the times of this ignorance God winked at ; but
" now commandeth all men every-where to repent ; be-
" cause he hath appointed a day in which he will judge
" the world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath
(( ordained : whereof he hath given assurance unto all
" men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." So
that we see, where any thing more was necessary to be
proposed to be believed, as there was to the heathen
idolaters, there the apostles were careful not to omit it.

Acts xviii. 4, " Paul at Corinth reasoned in the syna-
" gogue every sabbath-day, and testified to the jews,
" that Jesus was the Messiah." Ver. 11, " And he
" continued there a year and six months, teaching the
" word of God amongst them ; " i. e. The good new?,
that Jesus was the Messiah ; as we have already shown
is meant by " the Word of God."

Apollos, another preacher of the gospel, when he was
instructed in the way of God more perfectly, what did
he teach but this same doctrine ? As we may see in this
account of him, Acts xviii. 27. That, " when he was
•' come into Achaia, he helped the brethren much, who
" had believed through grace. For he mightily con-
" vinced the jews, and that publicly, showing by the
" scriptures that Jesus was the Messiah."

St. Paul, in the account he gives of himself before
Festus and Agrippa, professes this alone to be the doctrine
he taught after his conversion : for, says he, Acts xxvi.
22, " Having obtained help of God, I continue unto
" this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none
" other things than those which the prophets and Moses
" did say should come : that the Messiah should suffer, and

28 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" thathe shouldbethe first that should rise from the dead,
" and should show light unto the people, and to the gen-
" tiles." Which was no more than to prove that Jesus
was the Messiah. This is that, which, as we have above
observed, is called the Word of God ; Acts xi. 1. com
pared with the foregoing chapter, from v. 34. to the
end. And xiii. 42. compared with 44, 46, 48, 49, and
xvii. 13. compared with v. 11, 13. It is also called,
" the Word of the Gospel," Acts xv. 7. And this is that
Word of God, and that Gospel, which, wherever their
discourses are set down, we find the apostles preached ;
and was that faith, which made both jews and gentiles
believers and members of the church of Christ ; purifying
their hearts, Acts xv. 9, and carrying with it remission
of sins, Acts x. 43. So that all that was to be believed
for justification, was no more but this single proposition,
that " Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ, or the Mes-
" siah." All, I say, that was to be believed for justifi
cation : for that it was not all that was required to be
done for justification, we shall see hereafter.

Though we have seen above from what our Saviour
has pronounced himself, John iii. 36, " that he that be*
" lieveth on the Son hath everlasting life ; and he that
" believeth not the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath
" of God abideth on him;" and are taught from John iv.
39, compared with v. 42, that believing on him, is be
lieving that he is the Messiah, the Saviour of the world ;
and the confession made by St. Peter, Matt. xvi. 16, that
he is " the Messiah, the Son of the living God," being the
rock, on which our Saviour has promised to build his
church ; though this I say, and what else we have al
ready taken notice of, be enough to convince us what it
is we are in the gospel required to believe to eternal life,
without adding what we have observed from the preach
ing of the apostles ; yet it may not be amiss, for the
farther clearing this matter, to observe what the evan
gelists deliver concerning the same thing, though in
different words ; which, therefore, perhaps, are not so
generally taken notice of to this purpose.

We have above observed, from the words of Andrew
and Philip compared, that " the Messiah, and him of
(f whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write,"

as delivered in the Scriptures. 29

signify the same thing. We shall now consider that
place, John i. a little farther. Ver. 41, "Andrew says
" to Simon, we have found the Messiah." Philip, on
the same occasion, v. 45, says to Nathanael, " we have
" found him of whom Moses in the law and the pro-
" phets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."
Nathanael, who disbelieved this, when, upon Christ's
speaking to him, he was convinced of it, declares his
assent to it in these words : " Rabbi, thou art the Son
" of God, thou art the king of Israel." From which
it is evident, that to believe him to be " Him of whom
" Moses and the prophets did write," or to be " the
" Son of God," or to be " the king of Israel," was in
effect the same as to believe him to be the Messiah :
and an assent to that, was what our Saviour received for
believing. For, upon Nathanael's making a confession
in these words, " Thou art the Son of God, thou art the
" king of Israel, Jesus answered and said to him, Be-
" cause I said to thee I saw thee under the fig-tree, dost
" thou BELIEVE ? Thou shalt see greater things than
" these," ver. 51. I desire any one to read the latter
part of the first of John, from ver. 25, with attention,
and tell me, whether it be not plain, that this phrase,
The Son of God, is an expression used for the Messiah.
To which let him add Martha's declaration of her faith,
John xi. 27, in these words : " I believe that thou art
" the Messiah, THE SON OF GOD, who should come
" into the world ;" and that passage of St. John xx. 31,
" That ye might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, THE
" SON OF GOD ; and that, believing, ye might have life
." through his name :" and then tell me whether he can
doubt that Messiah, the Son of God, were synonymous
terms, at that time, amongst the jews.

The prophecy of Daniel, chap. ix. when he is called
" Messiah the Prince ;" and the mention of his govern
ment and kingdom, and the deliverance by him, in
Isaiah, Daniel, and other prophecies, understood of the
Messiah ; were so well known to the jews, and had so
raised their hopes of him about this time, which, by
their account, was to be the time of his coming, to re-

30 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

store the kingdom of Israel ; that Herod no sooner heard
of the magi's inquiry after " Him that was born king
" of the jews," Matt. ii. but he forthwith " demanded
" of the chief priests and scribes, where the Messiah
" should be born," ver. 4. Not doubting but, if there
were any king born to the jews, it was the Messiali :
whose coming was now the general expectation, as ap
pears, Luke iii. 15, " The people being in expectation,
" and all men musing in their hearts, of John, whether
" he were the Messiah or not." And when the priests
and levites sent to ask him who he was ; he, understand
ing their meaning, answers, John i. 20, " That he was
" not the Messiah ; " but he bears witness, that Jesus
" is the Son of God," i. e. the Messiah, ver. 34.

This looking for the Messiah, at this time, we see
also in Simeon ; who is said to be *• waiting for the con-
" solation of Israel," Luke ii. 21. And having the
child Jesus in his arms, he says he had " seen the sal-
" vation of the Lord," ver. 30. And, " Anna coming
" at the same instant into the temple, she gave thanks
" also unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them
" that looked for redemption in Israel," ver. 38. And
of Joseph of Arimathea, it is said, Mark xv. 43, That
t( he also expected the kingdom of God:" by all which
was meant the coming of the Messiah ; and Luke xix.
11, it is said, " They thought that the kingdom of God
" should immediately appear."

This being premised, let us see what it was that John
the Baptist preached, when he first entered upon his
ministry. That St. Matthew tells us, chap. iii. 1, 2,
" In those days came John the Baptist preaching in the
" wilderness of Judea, saying, repent ; for the kingdom
" of heaven is at hand." This was a declaration of the
coming of the Messiah : the kingdom of heaven, and
the kingdom of God, being the same, as is clear out of
several places of the evangelists ; and both signifying the
kingdom of the Messiah. The profession which John
the Baptist made, when sent to the jews, John i. 19, was,
that " he was not the Messiah;" but that Jesus was.
This will appear to any one, who will compare ver*

as delivered in the Scriptures. 31

26 — 34, with John iii. 27, 30. The jews being very
inquisitive to know, whether John were the Messiah ; he
positively denies it ; but tells them, he was only his fore
runner ; and that there stood one amongst them, who
would follow him, whose shoe-latchet he was not worthy
to untie. The next day, seeing Jesus, he says, he was
the man ; and that his own baptizing in water was only
that Jesus might be manifested to the world ; and that
he knew him not, till he saw the Holy Ghost descend
upon him : he that sent him to baptize, having told
him, that he on whom he should see the Spirit descend,
and rest upon, he it was that should baptize with the
Holy Ghost ; and that therefore he witnessed, that " this
" was the Son of God," ver. 34, i. e. the Messiah ; and,
chap. iii. 26, &c. they come to John the Baptist, and
tell him, that Jesus baptized, and that all men went to
him. John answers, He has his authority from heaven ;
you know I never said, I was the Messiah, but that I
was sent before him. He must increase, but I must de
crease ; for God hath sent him, and he speaks the words
of God ; and God hath given all things into the hands
of his Son, " And he that believes on the Son, hath
" eternal life;" the same doctrine, and nothing else but
what was preached by the apostles afterwards : as we
have seen all through the Acts, v. g. that Jesus was the
Messiah. And thus it wras, that John bears witness of
our Saviour, as Jesus himself says, John v. 33.

This also was the declaration given of him at his
baptism, by a voice from heaven : " This is my be-
" loved Son in whom I am well pleased." Matt. iii. 17.
Which was a declaration of him to be the Messiah, the
Son of God being (as we have showed) understood to
signify the Messiah. To which we may add the first
mention of him after his conception, in the words of
the angel to Joseph, Matt. i. 21. " Thou shalt call
" his name Jesus," or Saviour ; " for he shall save
" his people from their sins." It was a received doc
trine in the Jewish nation, that at the coming of the
Messiah, all their sins should be forgiven them. These
words, therefore, of the angel, we may look upon as a
declaration, that Jesus was the Messiah; whereof these

32 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

words, " his people," are a farther mark : which sup
pose him to have a people, and consequently to be a
king.

After his baptism, Jesus himself enters upon his mi
nistry. But, before we examine what it was he pro
posed to be believed, we must observe, that there is a
threefold declaration of the Messiah.

1. By miracles. The spirit of prophecy had now for
many ages forsaken the jews ; and, though their com
monwealth were not quite dissolved, but that they lived
under their own laws, yet they were under a foreign
dominion, subject to the Romans. In this state their
account of the time being up, they were in expectation
of the Messiah, and of deliverance by him in a kingdom
he was to set up, according to their ancient prophecies
of him : which gave them hopes of an extraordinary
man yet to come from God, who, with an extraordinary
and divine power, and miracles, should evidence his
mission, and work their deliverance. And, of any such
extraordinary person, who should have the power of
doing miracles, they had no other expectation, but only
of their Messiah. One great prophet and worker of
miracles, and only one more, they expected ; who was to
be the Messiah. And therefore we see the people jus
tified their believing in him, i. e. their believing him
to be the Messiah, because of the miracles he did ; John
vii. 41. " And many of the people believed in him,
" and said, When the Messiah cometh, will he do more
" miracles, than this man hath done ? " And when the
jews, at the feast of dedication, John x. 24, 25, com
ing about him, said unto him, " How long dost thou
" make us doubt? If thou be the Messiah, tell us
" plainly; Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye
" believed not ; the works that I do in my Father's
" name bear witness of me." And, John v. 36, he
says, " I have a greater witness than that of John ; for
" the works, which the Father hath given me to do,
" the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that
" the Father hath sent me/' Where, by the way, we
may observe,, that his being " sent by the Father," is
but another way of expressing the Messiah ; which is

as delivered in the Scriptures. 33

evident from this place here, John v. compared with
that of John x. last quoted. For there he says, that his
works bear witness of him : And what was that witness?
viz. That he was " the Messiah." Here again he says,
that his works bear witness of him : And what is that
witness? viz. " That the Father sent him." By which
we are taught, that to be sent by the Father, and to be
the Messiah, was the same thing, in his way of declar
ing himself. And accordingly we find, John iv. 53, and
xi. 45, and elsewhere, many hearkened and assented to
his testimony, and believed on him, seeing the things
that he did.

2. Another way of declaring the coming of the Mes*
siah, was by phrases and circumlocutions, that did sig
nify or intimate his coming; though not in direct
words pointing out the person. The most usual of these
were, "The kingdom of God, and of heaven ;" because
it was that which was often spoken of the Messiah, in
the Old Testament, in very plain words : and a king
dom was that which the jews most looked after and
wished for. In that known place, Isa. ix. " The GO-
" VERNMENT shall be upon his shoulders; he shall be
" called the PRINCE of peace : of the increase of his
" GOVERNMENT and peace there shall be no end ; upon
" the THRONE of David, and upon his KINGDOM, to
" order it, and to establish it with judgment, and with
" justice, from henceforth even for ever." Micah v. 2,
" But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be lit-
" tie among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee
" shall he come forth unto me, that is to be the RULER
" in Israel." And Daniel, besides that he calls him
" Messiah the PRINCE," chap. ix. 25, in the account
of his vision " of the Son of man," chap. vii. 13, 14,
says, " There was given him dominion, glory, and a
" KINGDOM, that all people, nations, and languages
" should serve him : his dominion is an everlasting do-
" minion, which shall not pass away; and his KING-
" DOM that which shall not be destroyed." So that the
kingdom of God, and the kingdom of heaven, were
common phrases amongst the jews, to signify the times
of the Messiah, Luke xiv. 15, " One of the jews that

p

34 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" sat at meat with him, said unto him, Blessed is he
" that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God." Chap,
xvii. 20, The pharisees demanded, " when the king-
" dom of God should come?" And St. John Baptist
" came, saying, Repent ; for the kingdom of heaven is
" at hand ; " a phrase he would not have used in preach
ing, had it not been understood.

There are other expressions that signified the Mes
siah, and his coming, which we shall take notice of, as
they come in our way.

3. By plain and direct words, declaring the doctrine
of the Messiah, speaking out that Jesus was he ; as we
see the apostles did, when they went about preaching
the gospel, after our Saviour's resurrection. This was
the open clear way, and that which one would think
the Messiah himself, when he came, should have taken ;
especially, if it were of that moment, that upon men's
believing him to be the Messiah depended the forgive
ness of their sins. And yet we see, that our Saviour
did not : but on the contrary, for the most part, made
no other discovery of himself, at least in Judea, and at
the beginning of his ministry, but in the two former
ways, which were more obscure ; not declaring himself
to be the Messiah, any otherwise than as it might be
gathered from the miracles he did, and the conformity
of his life and actions with the prophecies of the Old
Testament concerning him : and from some general dis
courses of the kingdom of the Messiah being come, un
der the name of the " kingdom of God, and of hea-
" ven." Nay, so far was he from publicly owning
himself to be the Messiah, that he forbid the doing of
it : Mark viii. 27-— 30. " He asked his disciples,
" Whom do men say that I am ? And they answered}
" John the Baptist ; but some say Elias ; and others,
" one of the prophets." (So that it is evident, that even
those, who believed him an extraordinary person, knew
not yet who he was, or that he gave himself out for the
Messiah ; though this was in the third year of his mi
nistry, and not a year before his death.) " And he saith
" unto them, But whom say ye that 1 am ? And Peter
u answered and said unto him, Thou art the Messiah.

as delivered in the Scriptures. 35

" And he charged them, that they should tell no man
" of him." Luke iv. 41. " And devils came out of
" many, crying, Thou art the Messiah, the Son of
" God : and he, rebuking them, suffered them not to
" speak, that they knew him to be the Messiah."
Mark iii. 11, 12. " Unclean spirits, when they saw
'•" him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou
" art the Son of God : and he straitly charged them,
" that they should not make him known/' Here again
we may observe, from the comparing of the two texts,
that " Thou art the Son of God," or, " Thou art the
" Messiah," were indifferently used for the same thing.
But to return to the matter in hand.

This concealment of himself will seem strange, in
one who was come to bring light into the world, and
was to suffer death for the testimony of the truth. This
reservedness will be thought to look, as if he had a
mind to conceal himself, and not to be known to the
world for the Messiah, nor to be believed on as such.
But we shall be of another mind, and conclude this pro
ceeding of his according to divine wisdom, and suited
to a fuller manifestation and evidence of his being the
Messiah ; when we consider that he was to fill out the
time foretold of his ministry ; and after a life illustrious
in miracles and good works, attended with humility,
meekness, patience., and sufferings, and every way con
formable to the prophecies of him ; should be led as a
sheep to the slaughter, and with all quiet and submission
be brought to the cross, though there were no guilt,
nor fault found in him. This could not have been, if,
as soon as he appeared in public, and began to preach,
he had presently professed himself to have been the
Messiah ; the king that owned that kingdom, he pub
lished to be at hand. For the sanhedrim would then
have laid hold on it, to have got him into their power,
and thereby have taken away his life ; at least they
would have disturbed his ministry, and hindered the
work he was about. That this made him cautious, and
avoid, as much as he could, the occasions of provoking
them and falling into their hands, is plain from John
vii. 1. " After these things Jesus walked in Galilee ; "

D 2

36 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

out of the way of the chief priests and rulers ; " for
" he would not walk in Jewry, because the jews sought
" to kill him." Thus, making good what he foretold
them at Jerusalem, when, at the first passover after his
beginning to preach the gospel, upon his curing the
man at the pool of Bethesda, they sought to kill him,
John v. 16, " Ye have not," says he, ver. 38, " his
" word abiding amongst you ; for whom he hath sent,
" him ye believe not/' This was spoken more particu
larly to the jews of Jerusalem, who were the forward
men, zealous to take away his life : and it imports,
that, because of their unbelief and opposition to him,
the word of God, i. e. the preaching of the kingdom of
the Messiah, which is often called " the word of God,"
did not stay amongst them, he could not stay amongst
them, preach and explain to them the kingdom of the
Messiah.

That the word of God, here, signifies " the word of
" God," that should make Jesus known to them to be
the Messiah, is evident from the context : and this
meaning of this place is made good by the event. For,
after this, we hear no more of Jesus at Jerusalem, till
the pentecost come twelvemonth ; though it is not to
be doubted, but that he was there the next passover,
and other feasts between ; but privately. And now at
Jerusalem, at the feast of pentecost, near fifteen months
after, he says little of any thing, and not a word of the
kingdom of heaven being come, or at hand ; nor did he
any miracle there. And returning to Jerusalem at the
feast of tabernacles, it is plain, that from this time 'till
then, which was a year and a half, he had not taught
them at Jerusalem.

For, 1. it is said, John vii. 2, 15, That, he teach
ing in the temple at the feast of tabernacles, " the jews
" marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters,
" having never learned ? " A sign they had not been
used to his preaching : for, if they had, they would not
now have marvelled,

2. Ver. 19, He says thus to them : " Did not Moses
" give you the law, and yet none of you keep the law ?
" Why go ye about to kill me ? One work," or mira-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 37

cle, " I did here amongst you, and ye all marvel.
" Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision, and ye
" on the sabbath-day circumcise a man : if a man on
" the sabbath-day receive circumcision, that the law of
" Moses should not be broken, are ye angry with me,
" because I have made a man every way whole on the
" sabbath-day ? " Which is a direct defence of what h'j
did at Jerusalem, a year and a half before the work h^
here speaks of. We find he had not preached to them
there, from that time to this ; but had made good what
he had told them, ver. 38, " Ye have not the word of
" God remaining among you, because whom he hath
" sent ye believe not." Whereby, I think, he signifies
his not staying, and being frequent amongst them at
Jerusalem, preaching the gospel of the kingdom ; be
cause their great unbelief, opposition, and malice to
him, would not permit it.

This was manifestly so in fact : for the first miracle
he did at Jerusalem, which was at the second passover
after his baptism, brought him in danger of his life.
Hereupon we find he forbore preaching again there,
'till the feast of tabernacles, immediately preceding his
last passover : so that 'till the half a year before his pas
sion, he did but one miracle, and preached but once
publicly at Jerusalem. These trials he made there;
but found their unbelief such, that if he had staid and
persisted to preach the good tidings of the kingdom,
and to show himself by miracles among them, he could
not have had time and freedom to do those works which
his Father had given him to finish, as he says, ver. 36,
of this fifth of St. John.

When, upon the curing of the withered hand on the
sabbath-day, " The pharisees took counsel with the
" herodians, how they might destroy him, Jesus with-
" drew himself, with his disciples, to the sea : and a
" great multitude from Galilee followed him, and from
" Judea, and from Jerusalem, and from Idumea, and
" from beyond Jordan, and they about Tyre and Sidon,
" a great multitude ; when they had heard what great
" things he did, came unto him, and he healed them all,
" and CHAttGEDTHEM,THATTHEYStfOUJJ)NOTMAKE

38 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" HIM KNOWN : that it might he fulfilled which was
" spoken by the prophet Isaiah, saying1, Behold, my
" servant, whom I have chosen ; my beloved, in whom
" my soul is well pleased : 1 will put my spirit upon
" him, and he shall show judgment to the gentiles.
" He shall not strive, nor cry, neither shall any man
" hear his voice in the streets." Matt. xii. Mark iii.

And, John xi. 47, upon the news of our Saviour's
raising Lazarus from the dead, " The chief priests and
" pharisees convened the sanhedrim, and said, What
" do we ? For this man does many miracles." Ver. 53,
" Then from that day forth they took counsel together
" for to put him to death." Ver. 54, " Jesus therefore
" walked no more openly amongst the jews." His
miracles had now so much declared him to be the Mes
siah, that the jews could no longer bear him, nor he
trust himself amongst them ; " But went thence unto a
" country near to the wilderness, into a city called
" Ephraim ; and there continued with his disciples."
This was but a little before his last passover, as appears
by the following words, ver. 55. " And the jews pass-
" over was nigh at hand/' and he could not, now his
miracles had made him so well known, have been se
cure, the little time that remained, 'till his hour was
fully come, if he had not, with his wonted and neces
sary caution, withdrawn ; " And walked no more
" openly amongst the jews," 'till his time (at the next
passover) was fully come ; and then again he appeared
amongst them openly.

Nor would the Romans have suffered him, if he had
gone about preaching, that he was the king whom the
jews expected. Such an accusation would have been
forwardly brought against him by the jews, if they
could have heard it out of his own mouth ; and that had
been his public doctrine to his followers, which was
openly preached by the apostles after his death, when he
appeared no more. And of this they were accused,
Acts xvii. 5—9. " But the jews, which believed not,
" moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fel-
" lows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and
" set all the city in an uproar, and assaulted the house

as delivered in the Scriptures. 39

" of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people.
" And when they found them [Paul and Silas] not,
" they drew Jason, and certain brethren, unto the
" rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned
" the world upside down, are corne hither also ; whom
" Jason hath received : and these all do contrary to the
" decrees of Caesar, saying, That there is another king,
" one Jesus. And they troubled the people, and the
" rulers of the city, when they heard these things : and
" when they had taken security of Jason and the other,
" they let them go."

Though the magistrates of the world had no great re
gard to the talk of a king who had suffered death, and
appeared no longer any where ; yet, if our Saviour had
openly declared this of himself in his life time, with a
train of disciples and followers every where owning and
crying him up for their king ; the Roman governors of
Judea could not have forborne to have taken notice of
it, and have made use of their force against him. This
the jews were not mistaken in ; and therefore made
use of it as the strongest accusation, and likeliest to pre
vail with Pilate against him, for the taking away his
life ; it being treason, and an unpardonable offence,
which could not escape death from a Roman deputy,
without the forfeiture of his own life. Thus then they
accuse him to Pilate, Luke xxiii. 2. " We found this
" fellow perverting the nation, forbidding to give tri-
" bute to Caesar, saying, that he himself is a king ;"
or rather " the Messiah, the King."

Our Saviour, indeed, now that his time was come,
(and he in custody, and forsaken of all the world, and
so out of all danger of raising any sedition or dis
turbance,) owns himself to Pilate to be a king ; after
first having told Pilate, John xviii. 36, " That his
" kingdom was not of this world;" and, for a king
dom in another world, Pilate knew that his master at
Rome concerned not himself. But had there been any
the least appearance of truth in the allegations of the
jews, that he had perverted the nation, forbidding to
pay tribute to Caesar, or drawing the people after him,
as their king ; Pilate would not so readily have pro

40 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

nounced him innocent. But we see what he said to his
accusers, Luke xxiii. 13, 14. " Pilate, when he had
" called together the chief priests and the rulers of the
" people, said unto them, You have brought this man
" unto me as one that perverteth the people ; and
" behold, I, having examined him before you, have
" found no fault in this man, touching those things
" whereof you accuse him : no, nor yet Herod, for I
" sent you to him ; and, lo, nothing worthy of death
" is done by him." And therefore, finding a man of
that mean condition, and innocent life, (no mover of
seditions, or disturber of the public peace) without a
friend or a follower, he would have dismissed him, as a
king of no consequence ; as an innocent man, falsely
and maliciously accused by the jews.

How necessary this caution was in our Saviour, to
say or do nothing that might justly offend, or render
him suspected to the Roman governor ; and how glad
the jews would have been to have had any such thing
against him, we may see, Luke xx. 20. The chief
priests and the scribes " watched him, and sent forth
" spies, who should feign themselves just men, that
" might take hold of his words, that so they might
" deliver him unto the power and authority of the
« governor." And the very thing wherein they hoped
to- entrap him in this place, was paying tribute to
Caesar; which they afterwards falsely accused him of.
And what would they have done, if he had before them
professed himself to have been the Messiah, their King
and deliverer ?

And here we may observe the wonderful providence
of God, who had so ordered the state of the jews, at
the time when his son was to come into the world, that
though neither their civil constitution nor religious wor
ship were dissolved, yet the power of life and death was
taken from them ; whereby he had an opportunity to
publish " the kingdom of the Messiah ; " that is, his own
royalty, under the name of" the kingdom of God, and of
" heaven;" which the jews well enough understood,
and would certainly have put him to death for, had the
power been in their own hands. But this being no mat-

as delivered in the Scriptures t 41

ter of accusation to the Romans, hindered him not from*
speaking of the " kingdom of heaven," as he did, some
times in reference to his appearing in the world, and
being believed on by particular persons ; sometimes in
reference to the power should be given him by the Fa
ther at his resurrection ; and sometimes in reference to
his coming to judge the world at the last day, in the
full glory and completion of his kingdom. These were
ways of declaring himself, which the jews could lay no
hold on, to bring him in danger with Pontius Pilate, and
get him seized and put to death.

Another reason there was, that hindered him as much
as the former, from professing himself, in express words,
to be the Messiah ; and that was, that the whole nation
of the jews, expecting at this time their Messiah, and
deliverance, by him, from the subjection they were in
to a foreign yoke, the body of the people would cer
tainly, upon his declaring himself to be the Messiah,
their king, have rose up in rebellion, and set him at
the head of them. And indeed, the miracles that he
did, so much disposed them to think him to be the
Messfoh, that, though shrouded under the obscurity of
a mean condition, and a very private simple life ;
though he passed for a Galilean (his birth at Bethle
hem being then concealed), and assumed not to himself
any power or authority, or so much as the name of the
Messiah ; yet he could hardly avoid being set up by a
tumult, and proclaimed their king. So John tells us,
chap. vi. 14, 15, " Then those men, when they had
" seen the miracles that Jesus did, said, This is of a
" truth that prophet that should come into the world.
" When therefore Jesus perceived that they would
" come to take him by force to make him king, he
"departed again into a mountain, himself alone."
This was upon his feeding of five thousand with five
barley loaves and two fishes. So hard was it for him,
doing those miracles which were necessary to testify
his mission, and which often drew great multitudes af
ter him, Matt. iv. 25, to keep the heady and hasty
multitude from such disorder, as would have involved
him in it ; and have disturbed the course, and cut short

42 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

the time of his ministry ; and drawn on him the repu
tation and death of a turbulent, seditious malefactor ;
contrary to the design of his coming, which was, to be
offered up a lamb blameless,, and void of offence ; his
innocence appearing to all the world, even to him that
delivered him up to be crucified. This it would have
been impossible to have avoided, if, in his preaching
every- where, he had openly assumed to himself the title
of their Messiah ; which was all was wanting to set the
people in a flame ; who drawn by his miracles, and the
hopes of finding a Deliverer in so extraordinary a man,
followed him in great numbers. We read every-where
of multitudes, and in Luke xii. 1, of myriads that
were gathered about him. v_This conflux of people,
thus disposed, would not have failed, upon his declaring
himself to be the Messiah, to have made a commotion,
and with force set him up for their King. It is plain,
therefore, from these two reasons, why (though he came
to preach the gospel, and convert the world to a belief
of his being the Messiah ; and though he says so much
of his kingdom, under the title of the kingdom of God,
and the kingdom of heaven) he yet makes it not his bu
siness to persuade them, that he himself is the Messiah,
nor does, in his public preaching, declare himself to
be him. He inculcates to the people, on all occasions,
that the kingdom of God is come : he shows the way of
admittance into this kingdom, viz. repentance and
baptism ; and teaches the laws of it, viz. good life, ac
cording to the strictest rules of virtue and morality.
But who the King was of this kingdom, he leaves to his
miracles to point out, to those who would consider
what he did, and make the right use of it now ; or to
witness to those who should hearken to the apostles
hereafter when they preached it in plain words, and
called upon them to believe it, after his resurrection,
when there should be no longer room to fear, that it
should cause any disturbance in civil societies, and the
governments of the world. ; But he could not declare
himself to be the Messiah, without manifest danger of
tumult and sedition : and the miracles he did declared
it so much, that he was fain often to hide himself, and

a* delivered in the Scriptures. 43

withdraw from the concourse of the people. The leper
that he cured, Mark i, though forbid to say any thing,
yet " blazed it so abroad, that Jesus could no more
" openly enter into the city, but was without in desert
" places," living in retirement, as appears from Luke
v. 16, and there " they came to him from every quar-
" ter." And thus he did more than once.

This being premised, let us take a view of the pro
mulgation of the gospel by our Saviour himself, and see
what it was he taught the world, and required men to
believe.

The first beginning of his ministry, whereby he
showed himself, seems to be at Cana in Galilee, soon
after his baptism ; where he turned water into wine : of
which St. John, chap. ii. 11, says thus: " This begin-
" ning of miracles Jesus made, and manifested his
" glory, and his disciples believed in him." His dis
ciples here believed in him, but we hear not of any
other preaching to them, but by this miracle, whereby
he " manifested his glory," i. e. of being the Messiah,
the Prince. So Nathanael, without any other preach
ing, but only our Saviour's discovering to him, that he
knew him after an extraordinary manner, presently ac
knowledges him to be the Messiah ; crying, " Rabbi,
" thou art the Son of God ; thou art the King of
" Israel."

From hence, staying a few days at Capernaum, he
goes to Jerusalem, to the passover, and there he drives
the traders out of the temple, John ii. 12 — 15, saying,
" Make not my Father's house a house of merchan-
'* dize." Where we see he uses a phrase, which, by
interpretation, signifies that he was the " Son of God,"
though at that time unregarded. Ver. 16, Hereupon
the jews demand, " What sign dost thou show us, since
" thou doest these things?" Jesus answered, " Destroy
" ye this temple, and in three days I will raise it
" again." This is an instance of what way Jesus took
to declare himself: for it is plain, by their reply, the
jews understood him not, nor his disciples neither ; for
it is said, ver. 22, " When, therefore, he was risen
" from the dead, his disciples remembered, that he

44 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" said this to them : and they believed the scripture,
" and the saying of Jesus to them."

This, therefore, we may look on in the beginning, as
a pattern of Christ's preaching, and showing himself to
the jews, which he generally followed afterwards ; viz.
such a manifestation of himself, as every one at present
could not understand ; but yet carried such an evidence
with it, to those who were well disposed now, or would
reflect on it when the whole course of his ministry was
over, as was sufficient clearly to convince them that he
was the Messiah.

The reason of this method used by our Saviour, the
scripture gives us here, at this his first appearing in
public, after his entrance upon his ministry, to be a
rule and light to us in the whole course of it : for the
next verse taking notice, that many believed on him,
" because of his miracles," (which was all the preach
ing they had,) it is said, ver. 24, " But Jesus did not
" commit himself unto them, because he knew all
" men;" i. e. he declared not himself so openly to be
the Messiah, their King, as to put himself into the power
of the jews, by laying himself open to their malice ;
who, he knew, would be so ready to lay hold on it to
accuse him ; for, as the next verse 25, shows, he knew
well enough what was in them. We may here further
observe, that " believing in his name " signifies believ
ing him to be the Messiah. Ver. 22, tells us, That
" many at the passover believed in his name, when they
" saw the miracles that he did." What other faith
could these miracles produce in them who saw them,
but that this was he of whom the scripture spoke, who
was to be their Deliverer?

Whilst he was now at Jerusalem, Nicodemus, a ruler
of the jews, comes to him, John iii. 1 — 21, to whom he
preaches eternal life by faith in the Messiah, ver. 15 and
17, but in general terms, without naming himself to be
that Messiah, though his whole discourse tends to it.
This is all we hear of our Saviour the first year of his
ministry, but only his baptism, fasting, and temptation
in the beginning of it, and spending the rest of it after
the passover, in Judea with his disciples, baptizing

as delivered in the Scriptures. 45

there. But " when he knew that the pharisees re-
" ported, that he made and baptized more disciples
" than John, he left Judea," and got out of their way
again into Galilee, John iv. 1, 3.

In his way back, by the well of Sichar, he discourses
with the Samaritan woman ; and after having opened to
her the true and spiritual worship which was at hand,
which the woman presently understands of the times of
the Messiah, who was then looked for ; thus she answers,
ver. 25, " I know that the Messiah cometh : when he
" is come, he will tell us all things." Whereupon our
Saviour, though we hear no such thing from him in
Jerusalem or Judea, or to Nicodemus ; yet here, to this
Samaritan woman, he in plain and direct words owns
and declares, that he himself, who talked with her, was
the Messiah, ver. 26.

This would seem very strange, that he should be more
free and open to a Samaritan, than he was to the jews,
were riot the reason plain, from what we have observed
above. He was now out of Judea,, among a people with
whom the jews had no commerce ; ver. 9, who were not
disposed, out of envy, as the jews were, to seek his life,
or to accuse him to the Roman governor, or to make an
insurrection, to set a jew up for their King. What the
consequence was of his discourse with this Samaritan
woman, we have an account, ver. 28, 39 — 42. " She left
" her water-pot, and went her way into the city, and
" saith to the men, Come, see a man who told me all
" things that ever I did : Is not this the Messiah ? And
" many of the Samaritans of that cityBELiEVED ON HIM
" for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told
" me all that ever I did. So when the Samaritans were
" come unto him, they besought him, that he would
" tarry with them : and he abode there two days. And
" many more believed, because of his own word ; and
" said unto the woman, Now we believe not because of
" thy saying : for we have heard him ourselves ; and we
" know/' (i.e. are fully persuaded) " that this is indeed
" the Messiah, the Saviour of the world/' By compar
ing ver. 39, with 41 and 42, it is plain, that " believ-

46 The Reasonableness of Christianity*

" ing on him" signifies no more than believing him to
be the Messiah.

From Sichar Jesus goes to Nazareth, the place he was
bred up in ; and there reading in the synagogue a pro
phecy concerning the Messiah, out of the Ixi. of Isaiah,
he tells them, Luke iv. 21, " This day is this scripture
" fulfilled in your ears."

But being in danger of his life at Nazareth, he leaves
it for Capernaum : and then, as St. Matthew informs
us, chap. iv. 17, " He began to preach and say, Re-
" pent ; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. " Or,
as St. Mark has it, chap. i. 14, 15, " Preaching the
" gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time
" is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand ;
" repent ye, and believe the gospel ; " i. e. believe this
good news. This removing to Capernaum, and seating
himself there in the borders of Zabulon and Naphtali,
was, as St. Matthew observes, chap. iv. 13 — 16, that a
prophecy of Isaiah might be fulfilled. Thus the ac
tions and circumstances of his life answered the prophe
cies, and declared him to .be the Messiah. And by what
St. Mark says in this place, it is manifest, that the
gospel which he preached and required them to believe,
was no other but the good tidings of the coming of the
Messiah, and of his kingdom, the time being now ful
filled.

In his way to Capernaum, being come to Cana, a
nobleman of Capernaum came to him, ver. 47, " And
" besought him that he would come down and heal his
" son ; for he was at the point of death." Ver. 48,
" Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and
" wonders, ye will not believe." Then he returning
homewards, and finding that his son began to " mend
c< at the same hour which Jesus said unto him, Thy son
" liveth; he himself believed, and his whole house,"
ver. 53.

Here this nobleman is by the apostles pronounced to
be a believer. And what does he believe ? Even that
which Jesus complains, ver. 48, " they would not BE-
" LIEVE, except .they saw signs and wonders ; which

as delivered in the Scriptures. 47

could be nothing but what those of Samaria in the same
chapter believed, viz. that he was the Messiah. For we
no- where in the gospel hear of any thing else, that had
been proposed to be believed by them.

Having done miracles, and cured all their sick at
Capernaum, he says, " Let us go to the adjoining towns,
" that I may preach there also ; for therefore came I
" forth," Mark i. 38. Or, as St. Luke has it, chap. iv.
43, he tells the multitude, who would have kept him,
that he might not go from them, " I must evangelize,"
or tell the good tidings of " the kingdom of God to
" other cities also ; for therefore am I sent." And St.
Matthew, chap. iv. 23, tells us how he executed this
commission he was sent on : " And Jesus went about all
" Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching
" the gospel of the kingdom, and curing all diseases."
This then was what he was sent to preach every- where,
viz. the gospel of the kingdom of the Messiah ; and by
the miracles and good he did he let them know who
was the Messiah.

Hence he goes up to Jerusalem, to the second pass-
.over, since the beginning of his ministry. And here,
discoursing to the jews, who sought to kill him upon
occasion of the man whom he had cured carrying his bed
on the sabbath-day, and for making God his Father, he
tells them that he wrought these things by the power
of God,' and that he shall do greater things ; for that the
dead shall, at his summons, be raised ; and that he, by
a power committed to him from his Father, shall judge
them ; and that he.is sent by his Father, and that who
ever shall hear his word, and believe in him that sent
him, has eternal life. This though a clear description
of the Messiah, yet we may observe, that here, to the
angry jews, who sought to kill him, he says not a word
of his kingdom, nor so much as names the Messiah ; but
yet that he is the Son of God, and sent from God, he
refers them to the testimony of John the Baptist ; to the
testimony of his own miracles, and of God himself in
the voice from heaven, arid of the scriptures, and of
Moses. He leaves them to learn from these the truth
they were to believe, viz. that he was the Messiah sent

48 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

from God. This you may read more at large, John v.

1—47.

The next place where we find him preaching, was on
the mount, Matt. v. and Luke vi. This is by much the
longest sermon we have of his, any-where ; and, in all
likelihood, to the greatest auditory : for it appears to have
been to the people gathered to him from Galilee, and
Judea, and Jerusalem, and from beyond Jordan, and
that came out of Idumea, and from Tyre and Sidon,
mentioned Mark iii. 7, 8. and Luke vi. 17. But in this
whole sermon of his, we do not find one word of be
lieving, and therefore no mention of the Messiah, or any
intimation to the people who himself was. The reason
whereof we may gather from Matt. xii. 16, where "Christ
" forbids them to make him known ; " which supposes
them to know already who he was. For that this 12th
chapter of St. Matthew ought to precede the sermon in
the mount, is plain, by comparing it with Mark ii. be
ginning at ver. 13, to Mark iii. 8, and comparing those
chapters of St. Mark with Luke vi. And I desire my
reader, once for all, here to take notice, that I have all
along observed the order of time in our Saviour's preach
ing, and have not, as I think, passed by any of his dis
courses. In this sermon, our Saviour only teaches them
what were the laws of his kingdom, and what they must
do who were admitted into it, of which I shall have oc
casion to speak more at large in another place, being
at present only inquiring what our Saviour proposed as
matter of faith to be believed.

After this, John the Baptist sendsHo him this message,
Luke vii. 19, asking, " Art thou he that should come,
" or do we expect another? " That is, in short, Art thou
the Messiah ? And if thou art, why dost thou let me, thy
forerunner, languish in prison ? Must I expect deliver
ance from any other? To which Jesus returns this an
swer, ver. 22, 23, " Tell John what ye have seen and
" heard ; the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are
" cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the
" poor the gospel is preached ; and blessed is he who
" is not offended in me." What it is to be " offended,
" or scandalized in him," we may see by comparing

as delivered in the^ Scriptures. 49

Matt. xiii. 28, and Mark iv. 17, with Luke viii. 13.
For what the two first call " scandalized," the last call
" standing off from, or forsaking," i. e. not receiving
him as the Messiah (vid. Mark vi. 1—6.) or revolting
from him. Here Jesus refers John, as he did the jews
before, to the testimony of his miracles, to know who
he was ; and this was generally his preaching, whereby
he declared himself to be the Messiah, who was the
only prophet to come, whom the jews had any expec
tation of; nor did they look for any other person to be
sent to them with the power of miracles, but only the
Messiah. His miracles, we see by his answer to John
the Baptist, he thought a sufficient declaration amongst
them, that he was the Messiah. And therefore, upon
his curing the possessed of the devil, the dumb, and
blind, Matt. xii. the people, who saw the miracles, said,
ver. 23, " Is not this the son of David?" As much as '
to say, Is not this the Messiah? Whereat the pharisees
being offended, said, " He cast out devils by Beelzebub."
Jesus, showing the falsehood and vanity of their blas
phemy, justifies the conclusion the people made from
this miracle, saying, ver. 28, That his casting out devils
by the Spirit of God, was an evidence that the kingdom
of the Messiah was come.

One thing more there was in the miracles done by
his disciples, which showed him to be the Messiah ; that
they were done in his name. " In the name of Jesus of
" Nazareth, rise up and walk," says St. Peter to the
lame man, whom he cured in the temple, Acts iii. 6.
And how far the power of that name reached, they them
selves seem to wonder, Luke x. 17. " And the seventy
" returned again with joy, saying. Lord, even the devils
" are subject to us in thy name."

From this message from John the Baptist, he takes
occasion to tell the people that John was the forerunner
of the Messiah ; that from the time of John the Baptist
the kingdom of the Messiah began ; to which time all
the prophets and the law pointed, Luke vii. and
Matt. xi.

Luke viii. 1, " Afterwards he went through every
" city and village, preaching and showing the good tid«

E

50 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" ings of the kingdom of God." Here we see as every
where, what his preaching was., and consequently what
was to be believed.

Soon after, he preaches from a boat to the people on
the shore. His sermon at large we may read, Matt. xiii.
Mark iv. and Luke viii. But this is very observable,
that this second sermon of his, here, is quite different
from his former in the mount : for that was all so plain
and intelligible, that nothing could be more so ; whereas
this is all so involved in parables, that even the apostles
themselves did not understand it. If we inquire into
the reason of this, we shall possibly have some light,
from the different subjects of these two sermons. There
he preached to the people only morality ; clearing the
precepts of the law from the false glosses which were
received in those days, and setting forth th duties of a
good life in their full obligation and extent, beyond
what the judiciary laws of the Israelites did, or the civil
laws of any country could prescribe, or take notice of.
But here, in this sermon by the sea-side, he speaks of
nothing but the kingdom of the Messiah, which he does
all in parables. One reason whereof St. Matthew gives
us, chap. xiii. 35, " That it might be fulfilled which was
" spoken by the prophets," saying, " I will open my
" mouth in parables, I will utter things that have been
" kept secret from the foundations of the world." An
other reason our Saviour himself gives of it, ver. 11, 12,
" Because to you is given to know the mysteries of the
" kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For
" whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall
" have more abundantly ; but whosoever hath not," i. e.
improves not the talents that he hath, " from him shall
" be taken away even that he hath."

One thing it may not be amiss to observe, that our
Saviour here, in the explication of the first of these pa
rables to his apostles, calls the preaching of the king
dom of the Messiah, simply, " The word," and Luke
viii. 21, "The word of God:" from whence St. Luke,
in the Acts, often mentions it under the name of the
" word," and " the word of God/' as we have else
where observed. To which I shall here add that of Acts

as delivered in the Scriptures. £1

viii. 4, " Therefore they that were scattered abroad,
" went every- where preaching the word ;" which word,
as we have found by examining what they preached all
through their history, was nothing but this, that " Jesus
" was the Messiah :" I mean, this was all the doctrine
they proposed to be believed : for what they taught, as
well as our Saviour, contained a great deal more ; but that
concerned practice, and not belief. And therefore our
Saviour says, in the place before quoted, Luke viii. 21,
" they are my mother and my brethren, who hear the
" word of God, and do it :" obeying the law of the
Messiah their king being no less required, than their
believing that Jesus was the Messiah, the king and de
liverer that was promised them.

Matt. ix. 13, we have an account again of this preach
ing ; what it was, and how : " And Jesus went about all
" the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues,
" and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing
« every sickness and every disease among the people."
He acquainted them, that the kingdom of the Messiah
was come, and left it to his miracles to instruct and con
vince them, that he was the Messiah.

Matt. x. when he sent his apostles abroad, their com
mission to preach we have, ver. 75 8, in these words :
" As ye go, preach saying, The kingdom of heaven is
" at hand : heal the sick," &c. All that they had to
preach was, that the kingdom of the Messiah was come.

Whosoever should not receive them, the messengers
of these good tidings, nor hearken to their message, in
curred a heavier doom than Sodom and Gomorrah, at
the day of judgment, ver. 14, 15. But ver. 32, " Who-
" soever shall confess me before men, I will confess
" him before my Father who is in heaven." What
this confessing of Christ is, we may see by comparing
John xii. 42. with ix. 22. " Nevertheless, among the
" chief rulers also many believed on him ; but because
" of the pharisees they did not CONFESS HIM, lest they
" should be put out of the synagogue. And chap. ix.
22, " These words spake his parents, because they feared
" the jews ; for the jews had agreed already, that if any
" man did CONFESS THAT HE WAS THE MESSIAH,

E 2

5£ The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" he should be put out of the synagogue." By which
places it is evident, that to confess him was to confess
that he was the Messiah. From which, give me leave
to observe also, (what I have cleared from other places,
but cannot be too often remarked, because of the differ
ent sense has been put upon that phrase) viz. " that
" believing on, or in him," (for sis avrov is rendered
either way by the English translation,) signifies believing
that he was the Messiah. For many of the rulers (the
text says) " believed on him :" but they durst not con
fess what they believed, " for fear they should be put
" out of the synagogue." Now the offence for which
it was agreed that any one should be put out of the
synagogue, was, if he " did confess, that Jesus was the
" Messiah." Hence we may have a clear understand
ing of that passage of St. Paul to the Romans, where he
tells them positively, what is the faith he preaches, Horn.
x. 8, 9, " That is the word of faith which we preach,
" that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord
" Jesus, and believe in thine heart, that God hath raised
" him from the dead, thou shalt be saved;" and that
also of 1 John iv. 14, 15, " We have seen, and do tes-
" tify, that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of
" the world : whosoever shall confess, that Jesus is the
" Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God."
Where confessing Jesus to be the Son of God, is the
same with confessing him to be the Messiah ; those two
expressions being understood amongst the jews to sig
nify the same thing, as we have shown already.

How calling him the Son of God, came to signify
that he was the Messiah, would not be hard to show.
But it is enough, that it appears plainly, that it was so
used, and had that import among the jews at that time :
which if any one desires to have further evidenced to
him, he may add Matt. xxvi. 63. John vi. 69. and xi.
27. and xx. SI. to those places before occasionally taken
notice of.

As was the apostles commission, such was their per
formance; as we read, Luke xi. 6, "They departed
" and went through the towns, preaching the gospel,
" and healing every-where." Jesus bid them preach,

as delivered in the Scriptures. 53

" saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand." And
St. Luke tells us, they went through the towns preach
ing the gospel ; a word which in Saxon answers well
the Greek Euayyg'Atoi/, and signifies, as that does, " good
" news." So that what the inspired writers call the
gospel, is nothing but the good tidings, that the Messiah
and his kingdom was come ; and so it is to be under
stood in the New Testament, and so the angel calls it,
" good tidings of great joy," Luke ii. 10, bringing the
first news of our Saviour's birth. And this seems to be
all that his disciples were at that time sent to preach.

So, Luke ix. 59, 60, to him that would have excused
his present attendance, because of burying his father ;
" Jesus said unto him, let the dead bury their dead,
" but go thou and preach the kingdom of God." When
I say, this was all they were to preach, I must be under
stood that this was the faith they preached ; but with it
they joined obedience to the Messiah, whom they re
ceived for their king. So likewise, when he sent out the
seventy, Luke x. their commission was in these words,
ver. 9, " Heal the sick, and say unto them, The king-
" dom of God is come nigh unto you."

After the return of his apostles to him, he sits down
with them on a mountain ; and a great multitude being
gathered about them, St. Luke tells us, chap. ix. 11,
" The people followed him, and he received them, and
" spake unto them of the kingdom of God, and healed
" them that had need of healing." This was his
preaching to this assembly, which consisted of five
thousand men, besides women and children : all which
great multitude he fed with five loaves and two fishes,
Matt. xiv. 21. And what this miracle wrought upon
them, St. John tells us, chap. vi. 14, 15, " Then these
" men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did,
" said, This is of a truth that prophet that should
" come into the world," i. e. the Messiah. For the
Messiah was the only person that they expected from
God, and this the time they looked for him. And
hence John the Baptist, Matt. xi. 3, styles him, " He
" that should come ;" as in other places, " come from

54 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" God," or " sent from God," are phrases used for
the Messiah.

Here we see our Saviour keep to his usual method of
preaching : he speaks to them of the kingdom of God,
and does miracles ; by which they might understand
him to be the Messiah, whose kingdom he spake of.
And here we have the reason also, why he so much
concealed himself, and forbore to own his being the
Messiah. For what the consequence was, of the mul
titude's but thinking him so, when they were got to
gether, St. John tells us in the very next words: " When
" Jesus then perceived, that they would come and take
" him by force to make him a king, he departed again
" into a mountain himself alone." If they were so
ready to set him up for their king, only because they
gathered from his miracles that he was the Messiah,
whilst he himself said nothing of it : what would not
the people have done, and what would not the scribes
and pharisees have had an opportunity to accuse him
of, if he had openly professed himself to have been the
Messiah, that king they looked for ? But this we have
taken notice of already.

From hence going to Capernaum, whither he was
followed by a- great part of the people, whom he had
the day before so miraculously fed ; he, upon the occa
sion of their following him for the loaves, bids them
seek for the meat that endureth to eternal life : and
thereupon, John vi. 22 — 69, declares to them his being
sent from the Father ; and that those who believed in
him, should be raised to eternal life : but all this very
much involved in a mixture of allegorical terms of eat
ing, and of bread ; bread of life, which came down
from heaven, &c. Which is all comprehended and
expounded in these short and plain words, ver. 47 and
54, " Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth
" on me hath everlasting life, and I will raise him up
" at the last day." The sum of all which discourse is,
that he was the Messiah sent from God ; and that those
who believed him to be so, should be raised from the
dead at the last day, to eternal life. These whom he

as delivered in the Scriptures. 55

spoke to here were of those who, the day before, would
by force have made him king ; and therefore it is no
wonder he should speak to them of himself, and his
kingdom and subjects, in obscure and mystical terms ;
and such as should offend those who looked for nothing
but the grandeur of a temporal kingdom in this world,
and the protection and prosperity they had promised
themselves under it. The hopes of such a kingdom,
now that they had found a man that did miracles, and
therefore concluded to be the Deliverer they expected ;
had the day before almost drawn them into an open in
surrection, and involved our Saviour in it. This he
thought fit to put a stop to ; they still following him,
'tis like, with the same design. And therefore, though
he here speaks to them of his kingdom, it was in a
way that so plainly baulked their expectation, and
shocked them, that when they found themselves disap
pointed of those vain hopes, and that he talked of their
eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, that they might
have life ; the jews said, ver. 52, " How can this man
" give us his flesh to eat ? And many, even of his dis-
" ciples said, It was an hard saying : Who can hear it?"
And so were scandalized in him, and forsook him, ver.
60, 66. But what the true meaning of this discourse of our
Saviour was, the confession of St. Peter, who understood
it better, and answered for the rest of the apostles, shows:
when Jesus answered him, ver. 67, " Will ye also go
" away?" Then Simon Peter answered him, " Lord, to
" whom shall we go ? Thou hast the words of eternal
" life :" i. e. thou teachest us the way to attain eternal
life ; and accordingly, " we believe, and are sure, that
" thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
This was the eating his flesh and drinking his blood,
whereby those who did so had eternal life.

Some time after this, he inquires of his disciples,
Mark viii. 27, who the people took him for ? They tell
ing him, " for John the Baptist," or one of the old
prophets risen from the dead ; he asked, What they
themselves thought ? And here again, Peter answers in
these words, Mark viii. 29, " Thou art the Messiah,"
Luke ix, 20, " The Messiah of God." And Matt,

56 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

xvi. 16, " Thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living
" God:'* Which expressions, we may hence gather,
amount to the same thing. Whereupon our Saviour
tells Peter, Matt. xvi. 17, 18, That this was such a
truth " as flesh and blood could not reveal to him, but
" only his Father who was in heaven ;" and that this
was the foundation, on which he was " to build his
" church :" by all the parts of which passage it is
more than probable, that he had never yet told his
apostles in direct words, that he was the Messiah ; but
that they had gathered it from his life and miracles.
For which we may imagine to ourselves this probable
reason ; because that, if he had familiarly, and in di
rect terms, talked to his apostles in, private, that he
was the Messiah the Prince, of whose kingdom he
preached so much in public every-where ; Judas,
whom he knew false and treacherous, would have been
readily made use of, to testify against him, in a matter
that would have been really criminal to the Roman go
vernor. This, perhaps, may help to clear to us that
seemingly abrupt reply of our Saviour to his apostles,
John vi. 70, when they confessed him to be the Mes
siah : I will, for the better explaining of it, set down
the passage at large. Peter having said, " We believe
" and are sure that thou art the Messiah, the Son of the
" living God ; Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen
" you twelve, and one of you is JW'goAo? ?" This is a
reply, seeming at first sight, nothing to the purpose ;
when yet it is sure all our Saviour's discourses were wise
and pertinent. It seems therefore to me to carry this
sense, to be understood afterwards by the eleven (as
that of destroying the temple, and raising it again in
three days was) when they should reflect on it, after his
being betrayed by Judas : you have confessed, and be
lieve the truth concerning me ; I am the Messiah your
king : but do not wonder at it, that I have never
openly declared it to you ; for amongst you twelve,
whom 1 have chosen to be with me, there is one who is
an informer, or false accuser, (for so the Greek word
signifies, and may, possibly, here be so translated, ra
ther than devil) who, if I had owned myself in plain

as delivered in the Scriptures. 57

words to have been the " Messiah, the king of Israel/'
would have betrayed me, and informed against me.

That he was yet cautious of owning himself to his
apostles, positively, to be the Messiah, appears farther
from the manner wherein he tells Peter, ver. 18, that
he will build his church upon that confession of his,
that he was the Messiah : I say unto thee, " Thou art
" Cephas," or a rock, " and upon this rock I will build
" my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail
" against it." Words too doubtful to be laid hold on
against him, as a testimony that he professed himself
to be the Messiah ; especially if we join with them the
following words, ver. 19, " And I will give thee the
" keys of the kingdom of heaven, and what thou shalt
" bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven ; and what
" thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven."
Which being said personally to Peter, render the fore- \
going words of our Saviour (wherein he declares the
fundamental article of his church to be the believing
him to be the Messiah) the more obscure and doubtful,
and less liable to be made use of against him ; but yet
such as might afterwards be understood. And for the
same reason, he yet, here again, forbids the apostles to
say that he was the Messiah, ver. 20.

From this time (say the evangelists) " Jesus began to
" show to his disciples," i. e. his apostles, (who are often
called disciples,) " that he must go to Jerusalem, and
" suffer many things from the elders, chief priests, and
" scribes ; and be killed, and be raised again the third
" day/' Matt. xvi. 21. These, though all marks of
the Messiah, yet how little understood by the apostles,
or suited to their expectation of the Messiah, appears
from Peter's rebuking him for it in the following words,
Matt. xvi. 22. Peter had twice before owned him to
be the Messiah, and yet he cannot here bear that he
should suffer, and be put to death, and be raised again.
Whereby we may perceive, how little yet Jesus had ex
plained to the apostles what personally concerned him
self. They had been a good while witnesses of his life
and miracles : and thereby being grown into a belief
that he was the Messiah, were, in soi^e degree, prepared

58 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

to receive the particulars that were to fill up that cha
racter, and answer the prophecies concerning- him. This,
from henceforth/ he began to open to them (though in
a way which the jews could not form an accusation out
of;) the time of the accomplishment of all, in his suffer
ings, death, and resurrection, now drawing on. For
this was in the last year of his life : he being to meet the
jews at Jerusalem but once more at the passover, and
then they should have their will upon him : and, there
fore,, he might now begin to be a little more open con
cerning himself: though yet so, as to keep himself out
of the reach of any accusation, that might appear just
or weighty to the Roman deputy.

After his reprimand to Peter, telling him, " That he
" savoured not the things of God, but of man," Mark
viii. 84, he calls the people to him, and prepares those,
who would be his disciples, for suffering, telling them,
ver. 38, " Whosoever shall be ashamed of me and my
*' words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of
" him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he
" cometh in the glory of his Father, with the holy an-
" gels :" and then subjoins, Matt. xvi. 27, 28, two
great and solemn acts, wherein he would show himself
to be the Messiah, the king : " For the Son of man shall
" come in the glory of his Father, with his angels ; and
" then he shall render to every man according to his
" works." This is evidently meant of the glorious ap
pearance of his kingdom, when he shall come to judge
the world at the last day ; described more at large,
Matt. xxv. " When the Son of man shall come in his
" glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he
" sit upon the* THRONE of his glory. Then shall the
" KING say to them on his right hand," &c.

But what follows in the place above quoted, Matt,
xvi. 28, " Verily, verily, there be some standing here,
" who shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of
" man coming in his kingdom ;" importing that do
minion, which some there should see him exercise over
the nation of the jews ; was so covered, by being an
nexed to the preaching, ver. 27, (where he spoke of the
manifestation and glory of his kingdom, at the day of

as delivered in the Scriptures. 59

judgment,) that though his plain meaning here in ver.
28, be, that the appearance and visible exercise of his
kingly power in his kingdom was so near, that some 4
there should live to see it ; yet if the foregoing words
had not cast a shadow over these latter, but they had
been left plainly to be understood, as they plainly sig
nified ; that he should be a King, and that it was so
near, that some there should see him in his kingdom ;
this might have been laid hold on, and made the matter
of a plausible and seemingly just accusation against him,
by the jews before Pilate. This seems to be the reason
of our Saviour's inverting here the order of the two so
lemn manifestations to the world, of his rule and power ;
thereby perplexing at present his meaning, and securing
himself, as was necessary, from the malice of the jews,
which always lay at catch to entrap him, and accuse
him to the Roman governor ; and would, no doubt, have
been ready to have alleged these words, " Some here
" shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man
" coming in his kingdom," against him, as criminal,
had not their meaning been, by the former verse, per
plexed, and the sense at that time rendered unintelligi
ble, and not applicable by any of his auditors to a sense
that might have been prejudicial to him before Pontius
Pilate. For how well the chief of the jews were dis
posed towards him, St. Luke tells us, chap. xi. 54,
" Laying wait for him, and seeking to catch something
" out of his mouth, that they might accuse him ;"
which may be a reason to satisfy us of the seemingly
doubtful and obscure way of speaking, used by our Sa
viour in other places; his circumstances being such,
that without such a prudent carriage and reservedness,
he could not have gone through the work which he came
to do ; nor have performed all the parts of it, in a way
correspondent to the descriptions given of the Messiah ;
and which would be afterwards fully understood to be
long to him, when he had left the world.

After this, Matt. xvii. 10, &c. he, without saying
it in direct words, begins, as it were, to own himself to
his apostles to be the Messiah, by assuring them, that as

60 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

the scribes, according to the prophecy of Malachi,
chap. iv. 5, rightly said, that Elias was to usher in the
Messiah ; so indeed Elias was already come, though the
jews knew him riot, and treated him ill ; whereby " they
" understood that he spoke to them of John the Bap-
" tist," ver. 13. And a little after he somewhat more
plainly intimates, that he is the Messiah, Mark ix. 41,
in these words : " Whosoever shall g'ive you a cup of
" water to drink in my name, because ye belong to the
" Messiah." This, as I remember, is the first place
where our Saviour ever mentioned the name of
Messiah ; and the first time that he went so far to
wards the owning, to any of the Jewish nation, himself
to be him.

In his way to Jerusalem, bidding one follow him,
Luke ix. 59, who would first bury his father, ver. 60,
" Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead ;
'•' but go thou and preach the kingdom of God." And
Luke x. 1, sending out the seventy disciples, he says to
them, ver. 9, " Heal the sick, and say, The kingdom
" of God is come nigh unto you." He had nothing
else for these, or for his apostles, or any one, it seems,
to preach, but the good news of the coming of the king
dom of the Messiah. And if any city would not receive
them, he bids them, ver. 10, " Go into the streets of
" the same, and say, Even the very dust of your city,
" which cleaveth on us, do we wipe off against you ;
" notwithstanding, be ye sure of this, that the king-
" dom of God is come nigh unto you." This they were
to take notice of, as that which they should dearly an
swer for, viz. that they had not with faith received the
good tidings of the kingdom of the Messiah.

After this, his brethren say unto him, John vii. 2, 3,
4, (the feast of tabernacles being near,) " Depart hence,
" and go into Judea, that thy disciples also may see the
" works that thou doest : for there is no man that does
" any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be
" known openly. If thou do these things, show thy-
" self to the world." Here his brethren, which, the
next verse tells us, " did not believe in him," seem to

as delivered in the Scriptures. 61

upbraid him with the inconsistency of his carriage ; as
if he designed to be received for the Messiah, and yet
was afraid to show himself: to whom he justified his
conduct (mentioned ver. 1.) in the folio wing verses, by
telling them, "That the world" (meaning the jews
especially) " hated him, because he testified of it, that
" the works thereof are evil ; and that his timew as
" not yet fully come," wherein to quit his reserve, and
abandon himself freely to their malice and fury. There
fore, though he " went up unto the feast," it was " not
" openly, but, as it were, in secret," ver. 10. And
here, coming into the temple about the middle of the
feast, he justifies his being sent from God ; and that he
had not done any thing against the law, in curing the
man at the pool of Bethesda, John v. 1 — 16, on the
sabbath-day ; which, though done above a year and a
half before, they made use of as a pretence to destroy
him. But what was the true reason of seeking his life,
appears from what we have in this viith chapter, ver.
25 — 34, " Then said some of them at Jerusalem, Is not
" this he whom they seek to kill ? But lo, he speaketh
" boldly, and they say nothing unto him. Do the
" rulers know indeed, that this is the very MESSIAH ?
" Howbeit, we know this man whence he is ; but when
" the Messiah cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.
" Then cried Jesus in the temple, as he taught, Ye
" both know me and ye know whence I am : and I
" am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true,
" whom ye know not. But I know him; for I am
" from him, and he hath sent me. Then they sought
" [an occasion] to take him, but no man laid hands on
" him, because his hour was not yet come. And many
" of the people believed on him, and said, When the
" Messiah cometh, will he do more miracles than these,
" which this man hath done ? The pharisees heard that
" the people murmured such things concerning him ;
" and the pharisees and thief priests sent officers to take
" him. Then said Jesus unto them, Yet a little while
" am I with you, and then I go to him that sent me :
" ye shall seek me, and not find me ; and where I am,
" there you cannot come. Then said the jews among

62 The Reasonableness of Christianity ,

" themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not
" find him ?" Here we find that the great fault in our
Saviour, and the great provocation to the jews, was his
being taken for the Messiah ; and doing such things as
made the people " believe in him ;" i. e. believe that
he was the Messiah. Here also our Saviour declares, in
words very easy to be understood, at least after his re
surrection, that he was the Messiah : for, if he were
" sent from God," and did his miracles by the Spirit
of God, there could be no doubt but he was the Messiah.
But yet this declaration was in a way that the pharisees
and priests could not lay hold on, to make an accu
sation of, to the disturbance of his ministry, or the
seizure of his person, how much soever they desired it :
for his time was not yet come. The officers they had
sent to apprehend him, charmed with his discourse, re
turned without laying hands on him, ver. 45, 46. And
when the chief priests asked them, " Why they brought
" him not?" They answered, " Never man spake like
" this man." Whereupon the pharisees reply, " Are
" ye also deceived ? Have any of the rulers, or of the
" pharisees, believed on him ? But this people, who
" know not the law, are cursed." This shows what
was meant " by believing on him," viz. believing that
he was the Messiah. For, say they, have any of the
rulers, who are skilled in the law, or of the devout and
learned pharisees, acknowledged him to be the Messiah?
For as for those who in the division among the people
concerning him, say, " That he is the Messiah," they
are ignorant and vile wretches, know nothing of the
scripture, and being accursed, are given up by God,
to be deceived by this impostor, and to take him for
the Messiah. Therefore, notwithstanding their desire
to lay hold on him, he goes on ; and ver. 37, 38, " In
" the last and great day of the feast, Jesus stood and
" cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto
" me and drink : he that believeth on me, as the scrip-
" ture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of
" living water/* And thus he here again declares him
self to be the Messiah ; but in the prophetic style, as
we may see by the next verse of this chapter, and those

as delivered in the Scriptures. 63

places in the Old Testament, that these words of our
Saviour refer to.

In the next chapter, John viii. all that he says con
cerning himself, and what they were to believe, tends
to this, viz. that he was sent from God his Father ; and
that, if they did not believe that he was the Messiah,
they should die in their sins : but this, in a way, as St.
John observes, ver. 27, that they did not well under
stand. But our Saviour himself tells them, ver. 28,
" When ye have lift up the Son of man, then ye shall
'* know that I am he."

Going from them, he cures the man born blind,
whom meeting with again, after the jews had questioned
him, and cast him out, John ix. 35 — 38, " Jesus said
" to him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?
" He answered, Who is he, Lord, that I might be-
" lieve on him ? And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast
" both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee.
" And he said, Lord, I believe." Here we see this
man is pronounced a believer, when all that was pro
posed to him to believe, was, that Jesus was " the Son
" of God," which was, as we have already shown, to
believe that he was the Messiah.

In the next chapter, John x. 1 — 21, he declares the
laying down of his life both for jews and gentiles ;
but in a parable which they understood not, ver.
6—20.

As he was going to the feast of the dedication, the
pharisees ask him, Luke xvii. 20, " When the king-
" dom of God," i. e. of the Messiah, " should come ?"
He answers, That it should not come with pomp and
observation, and great concourse ; but that it was al
ready begun amongst them. If he had stopt here, the
sense had been so plain, that they could hardly have
mistaken him ; or have doubted, but that he meant,
that the Messiah was already come, and amongst them ;
and so might have been prone to infer, that Jesus took
upon him to be him. But here, as in the place before
taken notice of, subjoining to this future revelation of
himself, both in his coming to execute vengeance on
the jews,, and in his coming to judgment, mixed toge-

64 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

ther, he so involved his sense, that it was not easy to
understand him. And therefore the jews came to him
again in the temple, John x. 23, and said, " How long
" dost thou make us doubt ? If thou be the Christ tell us
" plainly. Jesus answered, I told you, and ye BELIEVED
" not : the works that I do in my Father's name, they
" bear witness of me. But ye BELIEVED not, because
" ye are not of my sheep, as I told you." The BELIEV
ING here, which he accuses them of not doing, is plainly
their not BELIEVING him to be the Messiah, as the fore
going words evince ; and in the same sense it is evidently
meant in the following verses of this chapter.

From hence Jesus going to Bethabara, and thence re
turning into Bethany ; upon Lazarus's death, John xi.
25 — 27, Jesus said to Martha, " I am the resurrection
" and the life ; he that belie vet h in me, though he were
" dead, yet shall he live ; and whosoever liveth and be-
" lieveth in me shall not die for ever." So I understand

«7ro9ai/y] eif rov al&W, answerable to fyg-s-rxi si; TOV alwva, of
the septuagint, Gen. iii. 22, or John vi. 51, which we
read right, in our English translation, " live for ever."
But whether this saying of our Saviour here, can with
truth be translated, " He that liveth and believeth in
" me shall never die," will be apt to be questioned.
But to go on, " Believest thou this ? She said unto him,
" Yea, Lord, I believe that thou art the Messiah, the
" Son of God, which should come into the world."
This she gives as a full answer to our Saviour's demands ;
this being that faith, which, whoever had, wanted no
more to make them believers.

We may observe farther, in this same story of the
raising of Lazarus, what faith it was our Saviour ex
pected, by what he says, ver. 41, 42, " Father, I thank
" thee, that thou hast heard me ; and I know that thou
" hearest me always. But because of the people who
" stand by, I said it, that they may believe that thou
" hast sent me." And what the consequence of it was,
we may see, ver. 45, " Then many of the jews who
" came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus
" did, believed on him ;" which belief was, that he was
" sent from the Father ;" which, in other words, was,

as delivered in the Scriptures. 65

that he was the Messiah. That this is the meaning, in
the evangelists, of the phrase, of " believing on him,"
we have a demonstration in the following words, ver.
47» 48, " Then gathered the chief priests and pharisees
" a council, and said, What do we ? For this man does
" many miracles ; and if we let him alone, all men will
" BELIEVE ON HIM." Those who here say, all men
would BELIEVE ON HIM, were the chief priests and pha
risees, his enemies, who sought his life, and therefore
could have no other sense nor thought of this faith in
him, which they spake of; but only the believing him
to be the Messiah : and that that was their meaning, the
adjoining words show : " If we let him alone, all the
" world will believe on him ;" i. e. believe him to be
the Messiah. " And the Romans will come and take
" away both our place and nation." Which reasoning
of theirs was thus grounded : If we stand still, and let
the people " believe on him," i. e. receive him for the
Messiah : they will thereby take him and set him up for
their king, and expect deliverance by him ; which will
draw the Roman arms upon us, to the destruction of us
and our country. The Romans could not be thought to
be at all concerned in any other belief whatsoever, that
the people might have on him. It is therefore plain,
that " believing on him," was, by the writers of the
gospel, understood to mean the " believing him to be
" the Messiah." The sanhedrim therefore, ver. 53, 54,
from that day forth consulted to put him to death.
" Jesus therefore walked not yet" (for so the word m
signifies, and so I think it ought here to be translated)
" boldly," or open-faced, " among the jews," i. e. of
Jerusalem. '"'En cannot wellhere be translated "no more,"
because, within a very short time after, he appeared
openly at the passover, and by his miracles and speech
declared himself more freely than ever he had done ;
and all the week before his passion, taught daily in the
temple, Matt, xx. 17. Mark. x. 32. Luke xviii. 31, &c.
The meaning of this place seems therefore to be this :
that his time being not yet come, he durst not yet
show himself openly and confidently before the scribes
and pharisees., and those of the sanhedrim at Jerusalem,

*

66 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

who were full of rrialice against him, and had resolved
his death : " But went thence into a country near the
" wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there
" continued with his disciples," to keep himself out of
the way until the passover, " which was nigh at hand,"
ver. 55. In his return thither, he takes the twelve aside,
and tells them before-hand what should happen to him
at Jerusalem, whither they were now going ; and that
all things that are written by the prophets, concerning
the Son of man, should be accomplished ; that he should
be betrayed to the chief priests and scribes : and that they
should condemn him to death and deliver him to the
gentiles ; that he should be mocked, and spit on, and
scourged and put to death ; and the third day he should
rise again. But St. Luke tells us, chap, xviii. 34, That
the apostles " understood none of these things, and this
" saying was hid from them ; neither knew they the
" things which were spoken/' They believed him to
be the Son of God, the Messiah sent from the Father ;
but their notion of the Messiah was the same with the
rest of the jews, that he should be a temporal prince and
deliverer : accordingly we see, Mark x. 35, that, even
in this their last journey with him to Jerusalem, two of
them, James, and John, coming to him, and falling at
his feet, said, " Grant unto us that we may sit one on
" thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy
" glory :" or, as St. Matthew has it, chap. xx. 21, " in
" thy kingdom." That which distinguished them from
the unbelieving jews, was, that they believed Jesus to
be the very Messiah, and so received him as their King
and Lord.

And now, the hour being come that the Son of man
should be glorified, he, without his usual reserve, makes
his public entry into Jerusalem, riding on a young ass !
" As it is written, Fear not, daughter of Sion ; behold,
" thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt." But
" these things," says St. John, chap. xii. 16, " his dis-
" ciples understood not, at the first; but when Jesus
" was glorified, then remembered they that these things
" were written of him, and that they had done these
" things unto him." Though the apostles believed

as delivered in the Scriptures. 67

him to be the Messiah, yet there were many occurrences
of his life, which they understood not (at the time when
they happened) to be foretold of the Messiah ; which,
after his ascension, they found exactly to quadrate. Thus
according to what was foretold of him, he rode into the
city, " all the people crying-, Hosanna, blessed is the
" King of Israel, that cometh in the name of the Lord."
This was so open a declaration .of his being the Messiah,
that, Luke xix. 39> " Some of the pharisees from among
" the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy dis-
" ciples." But he was so far now from stopping them,
or disowning this their acknowledgment of his being
the Messiah, that he said unto them, " I tell you, that
" if these should hold their peace, the stones would im-
" mediately cry out." And again upon the like occa
sion of their crying, " Hosanna to the Son of David," in
the temple, Matt. xxi. 15, 16, " When the chief priests
" and scribes were sore displeased, and said unto him,
" Hearest thou what they say ? Jesus said unto them,
" Yea ; have ye never read, Out of the mouths of babes
" and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?" And now,
ver. 14, 15, "He cures the blind and the lame openly
" in the temple. And when the chief priests and
" scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the
" children crying in the temple, Hosanna, they were
" enraged." One would not think, that after the mul
titude of miracles that our Saviour had now been doing
for above three years together, the curing the lame and
blind should so much move them. But we must re
member, that though his ministry had abounded with
miracles, yet the most of them had been done about
Galilee, and in parts remote from Jerusalem. There is
but one left on record, hitherto done in that city ; and
that had so ill a reception, that they sought his life for
it : as we may read John v. 16. And therefore we hear
not of his being at the next passover, because he was
there only privately, as an ordinary jew : the reason
whereof we may read, John vii. 1, " After these things
" Jesus walked in Galilee ; for he would not walk in
" Jewry, because the jews sought to kill him."

Hence we may guess the reason why St. John omitted

F 2

68 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

the mention of his being at Jerusalem, at the third pass-
over, after his baptism ; probably because he did nothing
memorable there. Indeed when he was at the feast of
tabernacles, immediately preceding this his last pass-
over, he cured the man born blind : but it appears not to
have been done in Jerusalem itself, but in the way, as he
retired to the mount of Olives ; for there seems to have
been nobody by when he did it, but his apostles. Com
pare ver. 2. with ver. 8, 10, of John ix. This, at least,
is remarkable, that neither the cure of this blind man,
nor that of the other infirm man, at the passover, above
a twelve-month before, at Jerusalem, was done in the
sight of the scribes, pharisees, chief priests, or rulers.
Nor was it without reason, that in the former part of his
ministry, he was catitious of showing himself to them to
be the Messiah. But now, that he was come to the last
scene of his life, and that the passover was come, the ap
pointed time, wherein he was to complete the work he
came for, in his death and resurrection, he does many
things in Jerusalem itself before the face of the scribes,
pharisees, and whole body of the Jewish nation, to ma
nifest himself to be the Messiah. And, as St. Luke says,
chap. xix. 47, 48, " he taught daily in the temple : but
" the chief priests, and the scribes, and the chief of the
" people, sought to destroy him ; and could not find
" what they might do ; for all the people were very at-
" tentive to hear him." What he taught we are left to
guess, by what we have found him constantly preach
ing elsewhere : but St. Luke tells us, chap. xx. 1, " He
" taught in the temple, and evangelized;" or, as we
translate it, " preached the gospel;" which, as we have
showed, was the making known to them the good news
of the kingdom of the Messiah. And this we shall find
he did, in what now remains of his history.

In the first discourse of his, which we find upon re
cord, after this, John xii. 20, &c. he foretels his cru
cifixion, and the belief of all sorts, both jews and gen
tiles, on him after that. Whereupon the people say to
him, ver. 34, " We have heard out of the law, that the
" Messiah abideth for ever : and how sayest thou, that
<e the Son of man must be lifted up ? Who is this Son

as delivered in the Scriptures. 69

" of man?" In his answer, he plainly designs himself
under the name of Light ; which was what he had de
clared himself to them to be, the last time that they
had seen him in Jerusalem. For then at the feast of
tabernacles, but six months before, he tells them in the
very place where he now is, viz. in the temple, " I am
" the Light of the world ; whosoever follows me shall
" not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life ;"
as we may read, John viii. 12. And ix. 5, he says, "As
" long as I am in the world, I am the LIGHT of the
" world." But neither here, nor any- where else, does
he, even in these four or five last days of his life, (though
he knew his hour was come, and was prepared to his
death, ver. 27, and scrupled not to manifest himself to
the rulers of the jews to be the Messiah, by doing mi
racles before them in the temple,) ever once in direct
words own himself to the jews to be the Messiah ; though
by miracles and other ways he did every-where make it
known unto them, so that it might be understood.
This could not be without some reason ; and the pre-
servation_ jof .his life, which he came now to Jerusalem
on purpose to lay down, could not be it. What other
could it then be, but the same which liad made him use
caution in the former part of his ministry ; so to con
duct himself, that he might do the work which he came
for, and in all parts answer the character given of the
Messiah, in the law and the prophets ? He had fulfilled
the time of his ministry ; and now taught and did
miracles openly in the temple, before the rulers and
the people, not fearing to be seized. But he would
not be seized for any thing that might make him a
criminal to the government : and therefore he avoided
giving those, who, in the division that was about him,
inclined towards him, occasion of tumult for his sake :
or to the jews, his enemies, matter of just accusation,
against him, out of his own mouth, by professing him
self to be the Messiah, the King of Israel, in direct
words. It was enough that by words and deeds he de
clared it so to them, that they could not but under
stand him ; which it is plain they did, Luke xx. 16, 19.
Matt. xxi. 45. But yet neither his actions, which were

70 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

only doing of good ; nor words, which were mystical
and parabolical (as we may see, Matt. xxi. and xxii,
and the parallel places of Matthew and Luke;) nor
any of his ways of making himself known to be the
Messiah ; could be brought in testimony, or urged
against him, as opposite or dangerous to the govern
ment. This preserved him from being condemned as a
malefactor; and procured him a testimony from the
Roman governor, his judge, that he was an innocent
man, sacrificed to the envy of the Jewish nation. So
that he avoided saying that he was the Messiah, that to
those who would call to mind his life and death, after
his resurrection, he might the more clearly appear to be
so. It is farther to be remarked, that though he often
appeals to the testimony of his miracles, who he is, yet
he never tells the jews, that he was born at Bethlehem,
to remove the prejudice that lay against him, whilst he
passed for a Galilean, and which was urged as a proof
that he was riot the Messiah, John vii. 41, 42. The
healing of the sick, and doing good miraculously, could
be no crime in him, nor accusation against him. But
the naming of Bethlehem for his birth-place might have
wrought as much upon the mind of Pilate, as it did on
Herod's ; and have raised a suspicion in Pilate, as pre
judicial to our Saviour's innocence as Herod was to the
children born there. His pretending to be born at Beth
lehem, as it was liable to be explained by the jews
could not have failed to have met with a sinister inter
pretation in the Roman governor, and have rendered
Jesus suspected of some criminal design against the go
vernment. And hence we see, that when Pilate asked
him, John xix. 9, " Whence art thou ? Jesus gave him

no answer."

Whether our Saviour had not an eye to this straitness,
this narrow room that was left to his conduct, between
the new converts and the captious jews, when He says,
Luke xii. 50, " I have a baptism to be baptized with,
" and TTW? a-vvixopai, how am I straitened until it be ac-
" complished!" I leave to be considered. " I am
" come to send fire on the earth," says our Saviour,
" and what if it be already kindled?" i. e. There be-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 71

gin already to be divisions about me, John vii. 12, 43,
and ix. J6, and x. 19. And I have not the freedom,
the latitude, to declare myself openly to be the Messiah ;
though I am he, that must not be spoken on, until af
ter my death. My way to my throne is closely hedged
in on every side, and much straitened ; within which I
must keep, until it bring me to my cross in its due
time and manner ; so that it do not cut short the time,
nor cross the end of my ministry.

And therefore, to keep up this inoffensive character,
and not to let it come within the reach of accident or
calumny, he withdrew, with his apostles, out of the
town, every evening ; and kept himself retired out of
the way, Luke xxi. 37. " And in the day-time he was
" teaching in the temple, and every night he went out
*e and abode in the mount, that is called the Mount of
" Olives/' that he might avoid all concourse to him in
the night, and give no occasion of disturbance, or sus
picion of himself, in that great conflux of the whole na
tion of the jews, now assembled in Jerusalem at the
passover.

But to return to his preaching in the temple : he bids
them, John xii. 36, " To believe in the Light, whilst
" they have it." And he tells them, ver. 46, " I am
*6 the Light come into the world, that every one who
" believes in me, should not remain in darkness;"
which believing in him, was the believing him to be
the Messiah, as I have elsewhere showed.

The next day, Matt, xxi, he rebukes them for not
having believed John the Baptist, who had testified that
he was the Messiah. And then, in a parable, declares
himself to be the " Son of God," whom they should de
stroy ; and that for it God would take away the king
dom of the Messiah from them, and give it to the gen
tiles. That they understood him thus, is plain from.
Luke xxi. 16, " And when they heard it, they said,
" God forbid." And ver. 19, " For they knew that
" he had spoken this parable against them."

Much to the same purpose was his next parable,
concern ng " the kingdom of heaven," Matt. xxi.
1 — 10. That the jews not accepting of the kingdom

72 The Reasonableness of Christianity ',

of the Messiah, to whom it was first offered, other
should be brought in.

The scribes and pharisees and chief priests, not able
to bear the declaration he made of himself to be the
Messiah (by his discourses and miracles before them,
'/^Trpoo-Ofv auroJv, John xii. 37, which he had never done
before) impatient of his preaching and miracles, and
being not able otherwise to stop the increase of his fol
lowers, (for, " said the pharisees among themselves,
" Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing ? Behold, the
" world is gone after him,") John xii. 19. So that
" the chief priests, and the scribes, and the chief of the
" people sought to destroy him," the first day of his
entrance into Jerusalem, Luke xix. 47. The next day
again, they were intent upon the same thing, Mark xi.
17, 18, " And he taught in the temple ; and the scribes
*• and the chief priests heard it, and sought how they
" might destroy him ; for they feared him, because all
" the people were astonished at his doctrine."

The next day but one, upon his telling them the
kingdom of the Messiah should be taken from them,
" The chief priests and scribes sought to lay hands on
" him the same hour, and they feared the people,"
Luke xx. 19." If they had so great a desire to lay hold
on him, why did they not ? They were the chief priests
and the rulers, the men of power. The reason St. Luke
plainly tells us in the next verse : " And they watched
" him, and sent forth spies, who should feign them-
" selves just men, that they might take hold of his
" words, that so they might deliver him unto the
" power and authority of the governor." They wanted
matter of accusation against him, to the power they were
under ; that they watched for, and that they would have
been glad of, if they could have " entangled him in his
" talk;" as St. Matthew expresses it, chap. xxii. 15.
If they could have laid hold on any word, that had
dropt from him, that they might have rendered him
guilty, or suspected to the Roman governor; that would
have served their turn, to have laid hold upon him, with
hopes to destroy him. For their power not answering
their malice, they could not put him to death by their

as delivered in the Scriptures. 73

own authority, without the permission and assistance of
the governor ; as they confess, John xviii. 31, " It is
" not lawful for us to put any man to death." This
made them so earnest for a declaration in direct words,
from his own mouth, that he was the Messiah. It was
not that they would more have believed in him, for such
a declaration of himself, than they did for his miracles,
or other ways of making himself known, which it ap
pears they understood well enough. But they wanted
plain direct words, such as might support an accusation,
and be of weight before an heathen judge. This was
the reason why they pressed him to speak out, John x.
24, " Then came the jews round about him, and said
" unto him, How long dost thou hold us in suspense ?
" If thou be the Messiah, tell us PLAINLY, TrappW* ;"
i. e. in direct words : for that St. John uses it in that
sense we may see, chap. xi. 11 — 14, " Jesus saith to
" them, Lazarus sleepeth. His disciples said, If he
" sleeps, he shall do well. Howbeit, Jesus spake of
" his death ; but they thought he had spoken of taking
" rest in sleep. Then said Jesus to them plainly, wap-
" pcti<na, Lazarus is dead." Here we see what is meant
by Trapp'rxna, PLAIN, direct words, such as express the
same thing without a figure ; and so they would have
had Jesus pronounce himself to be the Messiah. And
the same thing they press again, Matt. xxvi. 6'3, the
high priest adjuring him by the living God, to tell
them whether he were the Messiah the Son of God;
as we shall have occasion to take notice by-and-by.

This we may observe in the whole management of
their design against his life. It turned upon this, that
they wanted and wished for a declaration from him in
direct words, that he was the Messiah ; something from
his own mouth that might offend the Roman power, and
render him criminal to Pilate. In the 21st verse of this
xxth of Luke, " They asked him, saying, Master, we
" know that thou sayest and teachest rightly ; neither
" acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the
" way of God truly. Is it lawful for us to give tribute
" to Caesar, or no ?" By this captious question they
hoped to catch him, which way soever he answered,

74 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

For if he had said they ought to pay tribute to Caesar,
it would be plain he allowed their subjection to the Ro
mans ; and so in effect disowned himself to be their
King and Deliverer; whereby he would have contra
dicted what his carriage and doctrine seemed to aim at,
the opinion that was spread amongst the people, that
he was the Messiah. This would have quashed the
hopes, and destroyed the faith of those that believed on
him ; and have turned the ears and hearts of the people
from him. If on the other side he answered, No, it is
not lawful to pay tribute to Caesar, they had out of
his own mouth wherewithal to condemn him before
Pontius Pilate. But St. Luke tells us, ver. 23, " He
" perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why
" tempt ye me ?" i. e. Why do ye lay snares for me ?
" Ye hypocrites, show me the tribute money ;" so it is,
Matt. xxii. 19, " Whose image and inscription has it ?
" They said Caesar's." He said unto them, " Render
" therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and
u to God the things that are God's." By the wisdom
and caution of which unexpected answer, he defeated
their whole design : " and they could not take hold of
" his words before the people ; and they marvelled at
" his answer j and held their peace." Luke xx. 26.
<( And leaving him, they departed." Matt. xxii. 22.

He having, by this reply (and what he answered to
the sadducees, concerning the resurrection, and to the
lawyer about the first commandment, Mark xii.) an
swered so little to their satisfaction or advantage, they
durst ask him no more questions, any of them. And now,
their mouths being stopped, he himself begins to ques
tion them about the Messiah ; asking the pharisees,
Matt. xxii. 41, " What think ye of the Messiah ? whose
" son is he ? They say unto him, the Son of David."
Wherein though they answered right, yet he shows them
in the following words, that, however they pretended to
be studiers and teachers of the law, yet they understood
not clearly the scriptures concerning the Messiah ; and
thereupon he sharply rebukes their hypocrisy, vanity,
pride, malice, covetousness, and ignorance ; and par
ticularly tells them, ver. 13, " Ye shut up the king-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 75

" dom of heaven against men : for ye neither go in
" yourselves, nor suffer ye them that are entering, to
" go in." Whereby he plainly declares to them, that
the Messiah was come, and his kingdom begun; but
that they refused to believe in him themselves, and
did all they could to hinder others from believing in
him ; as is manifest throughout the New Testament ;
the history whereof sufficiently explains what is meant
here by " the kingdom of heaven," which the scribes
and pharisees would neither go into themselves, nor
suffer others to enter into. And they could not choose
but understand him, though he named not himself in
the case.

Provoked anew by his rebukes, they get presently to
council, Matt. xxvi. 3, 4. " Then assembled together
" the chief priests, and the scribes and the elders of
" the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who
" was called Caiaphas, and consulted that they might
" take Jesus by subtlety, and kill him* But they said,
" Not on the feast-day, lest there should be an uproar
" among the people. For they feared the people/'
says Luke, chap. xxii. 2.

Having in the night got Jesus into their hands, by
the treachery of Judas, they presently led him away
bound to Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas. Annas,
probably, having examined him, and getting nothing
out of him for his purpose, sends him away to Caiaphas,
John xviii. 24, where the chief priests, the scribes, and
the elders were assembled, Matt. xxvi. 57. John xviii.
13, 19. " The high priest then asked Jesus of his dis-
" ciples, and of his doctrine. Jesus answered him, I
" spake openly to the world : I ever taught in the syna-
" gogue, and in the temple, whither the jews always
" resort, and in secret have I said nothing." A proof
that he had not in private, to his disciples, declared
himself in express words to be the Messiah, the Prince.
But he goes on : " Why askest thou me ?" Ask Judas,
who has been always with me. " Ask them who heard
" me, what I have said unto them ; behold, they know
" what I said." Our Saviour, we see here, warily de
clines, for the reasons above-mentioned, all discourse
of his doctrine* The sanhedrim, Matt, xxvi, 59,

76 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" sought false witness against him :" but when " they
" found none that were sufficient," or came up to the
point they desired, which was to have something against
him to take away his life (for so I think the words
Ira* and trn mean, Mark xiv. 56, 59.) they try again
what they can get out of him himself, concerning his
being the Messiah ; which, if he owned in express words,
they thought they should have enough against him at
the tribunal of the Roman governor, to make him " Ise-
" sae majestatis reum," and to take away his life. They
therefore say to him, Luke xxii. 67. " If thou be the
" Messiah, tell us." Nay, as St. Matthew hath it, the
high priest adjures him by the living God, to tell him
whether he were the Messiah. To which our Saviour
replies, " If I tell you, ye will not believe ; and if I
" also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go."
If I tell you, and prove to you, by the testimony given
me from heaven, and by the works that I have done
among you, you will not believe in me, that I am the
Messiah. Or if I should ask where the Messiah is to be
born, and what state he should come in ; how he should
appear, and other things that you think in me are not
reconcileable with the Messiah ; you will not answer
me, nor let me go, as one that has no pretence to be
the Messiah, and you are not afraid should be received
for such. But yet I tell you, " Hereafter shall the Son
" of man sit on the right hand of the power of God,"
ver. 70. " Then say they all, Art thou then the Son of
" God ? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am."
By which discourse with them, related at large here by
St. Luke, it is plain, that the answer of our Saviour,
set down by St. Matthew, chap. xxvi. 64, in these
words, " Thou hast said ;" and by St. Mark, chap. xiv.
62, in these, " I am ;" is in answer only to this ques
tion, "Art thou then the Son of God?" and not to
that other, " Art thou the Messiah ?" which preceded,
and he had answered to before ; though Matthew and
Mark, contracting the story, set them down together, as
if making but one question, omitting all the interven
ing discourse ; whereas it is plain out of St. Luke, that
they were two distinct questions, to which Jesus gave
two distinct answers. In the first whereof he, accord-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 77

ing to his usual caution, declined saying in plain ex
press words, that he was the Messiah ; though in the
latter he owned himself to be " the Son of God."
Which though they, being jews, understood to signify
the Messiah, yet he knew could be no legal or weighty
accusation against him before a heathen ; and so it
proved. For upon his answering to their question,
" Art thou then the Son of God ? Ye say that I am ;"
they cry out, Luke xxii. 71, " What need we any fur-
" ther witness ? For we ourselves have heard out of his
" own mouth." And so thinking they had enough
against him, they hurry him away to Pilate* Pilate
asking them, John xviii. 29 — 32, " What accusation
" bring you against this man ? They answered and said,
" If he were not a malefactor we would not have deli-
" vered him up unto thee." Then said Pilate unto
them, " Take ye him, and judge him according to your
" law." But this would not serve their turn, who aimed
at his life, and would be satisfied with nothing else.
" The jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for
" us to put any man to death." And this was also,
" That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which
" he spake, signifying what death he should die." Pur
suing therefore their design of making him appear, to
Pontius Pilate, guilty of treason against Caesar, Luke
xxiii. 2, " They began to accuse him, saying, We
" found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbid-
" ding to give tribute to Caesar ; saying, that he him-
" self is the Messiah, the King ;" all which were infe
rences of theirs, from his saying, he was " the Son of
" God :" which Pontius Pilate finding (for it is conso
nant that he examined them to the precise words he had
said), their accusation had no weight with him. How
ever, the name of king being suggested against Jesus,
he thought himself concerned to search it to the bot
tom, John xviii. 33 — 37. " Then Pilate entered again
" into the judgment-hall, and called Jesus, and said
" unto him, Art thou the king of the jews ? Jesus an-
" svvered him, Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others
" tell it thee of me ? Pilate answered, Am 1 a jew ?
(< Thine own nation and the chief priests have deli-

78 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" vered thee unto me : what hast thou done ? Jesus an-
" swered, My kingdom is not of this world : if my king-
" dom were of this world, then would my servants
" fight, that I should not be delivered to the jews ;
" but now my kingdom is not from hence. Pilate there-
" fore said unto him. Art thou a king then ? Jesus an-
" swered, Thou sayest that I am a king. For this end
" was I born, and for this cause came I into the world,
" that I should bear witness to the truth : every one
" that is of the truth heareth my voice." In this dia
logue between our Saviour and Pilate, we may observe,
1. That being asked, Whether he were " The king of
the jews ?" he answered so, that though he deny it not,
yet he avoids giving the least umbrage, that he had
any design upon the government. For, though he al
lows himself to be a king, yet, to obviate any suspicion,
he tells Pilate, " his kingdom is not of this world ;"
and evidences it by this, that if he had pretended to any
title to that country, his followers, which were not
a few, and were forward enough to believe him their
king, would have fought for him, if he had had a mind
to set himself up by force, or his kingdom were so to
be erected. " But my kingdom," says he, " is not
from hence," is not of this fashion, or of this place.

, 2. Pilate being, by his words and circumstances, sa
tisfied that he laid no claim to his province, or meant
any disturbance of the government; was yet a little
surprised to hear a man in that poor garb, without re
tinue, or so much as a servant, or a friend, own himself
to be a king ; and therefore asks him, with some kind
of wonder, " Art thou a king then?"

3. That our Saviour declares, that his great business
into the world was, to testify and make good this great
truth, that he was a king ; i. e. in other words, that he
was the Messiah.

4. That whoever were followers of truth, and got
into the way of truth and happiness, received this doc
trine concerning him, viz. That he was the Messiah,
their King.

Pilate being thus satisfied that he neither meant, nor
could there arise, any harm from his pretence, what-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 79

ever it was, to be a king; tells the jews, ver. 31, " I
" find no fault in this man." But the jews were the
more fierce, Luke xxiii. 5. saying, " He stirreth up the
" people to sedition, by his preaching through all
" Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place.'* And
then Pilate, learning that he was of Galilee, Herod's
jurisdiction, sent him to Herod ; to whom also " the
" chief priests and scribes," ver. 10, " vehemently ac-
" cused him." Herod, finding all their accusations
either false or frivolous, thought our Saviour a bare ob
ject of contempt; arid so turning him only into ridi
cule, sent him back to Pilate : who, calling unto him
the chief priests, and the rulers, and the people, ver.
14, " Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto
" me, as one that perverteth the people ; and behold, I
" having examined him before you, have found no
" fault in this man, touching these things whereof ye
" accuse him ; no, nor yet Herod ; for I sent you to
" him : and lo, nothing worthy of death is done by
" him." And therefore he would have released him :
" For he knew the chief priests had delivered him
" through envy," Mark xv. 10. And when they de
manded Barabbas to be released, but as for Jesus, cried,
" Crucify him ;" Luke xxiii. 9/2 ; " Pilate said unto
" them the third time, Why ? What evil hath he done ?
" I have found no cause of death in him ; I will, there-
" fore, chastise him, and let him go.

We may observe, in all this whole prosecution of the
jews, that they would fain have got it out of Jesus's own
mouth, in express words, that he was the Messiah :
which not being able to do, with all their heart and en
deavour ; all the rest that they could allege against him
not amounting to a proof before Pilate, that he claimed
to be king of the jews ; or that he had caused, or
done any thing towards a mutiny or insurrection among
the people (for upon these two, as we see, their whole
charge turned) ; Pilate again and again pronounced him
innocent : for so he did a fourth, and a fifth time ;
bringing him out to them, after he had whipped him,
John xix. 4, 6. And after all, " when Pilate saw that
" he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult

80 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" was made, he took water, and washed his hands be-
" fore the multitude, saying-, I am innocent of the
" blood of this just man : see you to it :" Matt, xxvii.
24. Which gives us a clear reason of the cautious and
wary conduct of our Saviour, in not declaring- himself,
in the whole course of his ministry, so much as to his
disciples, much less to the multitude, or to the rulers
of the jews, in express words, to be the Messiah the
King ; and why he kept himself always in prophetical
or parabolical terms (he and his disciples preaching
only the kingdom of God, i. e. of the Messiah, to be
come), and left to his miracles to declare who he was ;
though this was the truth, which he came into the
world, as he says himself, John xviii. 37, to testify and
which his disciples were to believe.

When Pilate, satisfied of his innocence, would have
released him ; and the jews persisted to cry out, " Cru-
" cify him, crucify him," John xix. 6, " Pilate says
" to them, Take ye him yourselves, and crucify him :
" for I do not find any fault in him." The jews then,
since they could not make him a state criminal, by
alleging his saying, that he was " the Son of God,"
say, by their law it was a capital crime, ver. 7. " The
" jews answered to Pilate, AVe have a law, and by our
" law he ought to die ; because he made himself the
" Son of God," i. e. because, by saying " he is the Son
" of God," he has made himself the Messiah, the pro
phet, which was to come. For we find no other law
but that against false prophets, Deut. xviii. 20, whereby
" making himself the Son of God," deserved death.
After this, Pilate was the more desirous to release him,
ver. 12, 13. " But the jews cried out, saying, If thou
" let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend ; whoso-
" ever maketh himself a king, speaketh against Caesar."
Here we see the stress of their charge against Jesus ;
whereby they hoped to take away his life, viz. that he
" made himself king." We see also upon what they
grounded this accusation, viz. because he had owned
himself to be " the Son of God." For he had in their
hearing, never made or professed himself to be a king.
We see here, likewise, the reason why they were SQ de-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 81

sirous to draw from his own mouth a confession in express
words, that he was the Messiah ; viz. That they might
have what might be a clear proof that he did so. And,
last of all, we see reason why, though in expressions
which they understood, he owned himself to them to be
the Messiah ; yet he avoided declaring it to them in such
words as might look criminal at Pilate's tribunal. He
owned himself to be the Messiah plainly, to the under
standing of the jews ; but in ways that could not, to the
understanding of Pilate, make it appear that he had laid
claim to the kingdom of Judea ; or went about to make
himself king of that country. But whether his saying
that he was " the Son of God," was criminal by their
law, that Pilate troubled not himself about.

He that considers what Tacitus, Suetonius, Seneca de
benef. 1. 3. c. 26. say of Tiberius and his reign, will
find how necessary it was for our Saviour, if he would
not die as a criminal and a traitor, to take great heed to
his words and actions ; that he did or said not any thing
that might be offensive, or give the least umbrage to
the Roman government. It behoved an innocent man,
who was taken natice of, for something extraordinary in
him, to be very wary under a jealous and cruel prince,
who encouraged informations, and filled his reign with
executions for treason ; under whom, words spoken in
nocently, or in jest, if they could be misconstrued, were
made treason, and prosecuted with a rigour, that made
it always the same thing to be accused and condemned.
And therefore we see, that when the jews told Pilate,
John xix. 12, that he should not be a friend to Caesar,
if he let Jesus go (for that whoever made himself king,
was a rebel against Caesar:) he asks them no more
whether they would take Barabbas, and spare Jesus, but
(though against his conscience) gives him up to death,
to secure his own head.

One thing more there is, that gives us light into this
wise and necessarily cautious management of himself,
which manifestly agrees with it and makes a part of it :
and that is, the choice of his apostles : exactly suited to
the design and foresight of the necessity of keeping the
declaration of the kingdom of the Messiah, which was

G

82 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

now expected, within certain general terms, during his
ministry. It was not fit to open himself too plainly or
forwardly to the heady jews, that he himself was the
Messiah ; that was to be left to the observation of those
who would attend to the purity of his life, the testimony
of his miracles, and the conformity of all with the pre
dictions concerning him : by these marks, those he lived
amongst were to find it out, without an express promul
gation that he was the Messiah until after his death.
His kingdom was to be opened to them by degrees, as
well to prepare them to receive it, as to enable him to
be long enough amongst them, to perform what was the
work of the Messiah to be done ; and fulfil all those
several parts of what was foretold of him in the Old
Testament, and we see applied to him in the New.

The jews had no other thoughts of their Messiah, but
of a mighty temporal prince, that should raise their na
tion into an higher degree of power, dominion, and pro
sperity than ever it had enjoyed. They were filled with
the expectation of a glorious earthly kingdom. It was
not, therefore, for a poor man, the son of a carpenter,
and (as they thought) born in Galilee, to pretend to it.
None of the jews, no, not his disciples, could have
borne this, if .he had expressly avowed this at first, and
began his preaching and the opening of his kingdom this
way, especially if he had added to it, that in a year or
two, he should die an ignominious death upon the cross.
They are therefore prepared for the truth by degrees.
First, John the Baptist tells them, " The kingdom of
" God " (a name by which the jews called the kingdom
of the Messiah) " is at hand." Then our Saviour comes,
and he tells them " of the kingdom of God;" some
times that it is at hand, and upon some occasions, that
it is come ; but says, in his public preaching, little or
nothing of himself. Then come the apostles and evan
gelists after his death, and they, in express words, teach
what his birth, life, and doctrine had done before, and
had prepared the well-disposed to receive, viz. That
" Jesus is the Messiah."

To this design and method of publishing the gospel,
was the choice of the apostles exactly adjusted ; a com-

as delivered in the Scriptures* .; 83

pany of poor, ignorant, illiterate men ; who, as Christ
himself tells us, Matt. xi. 25, and Luke x. 21, were not
of the " wise and prudent " men of the world : they
were, in that respect, but mere children. These, con
vinced by the miracles they saw him daily do, and the
unblameable life he led, might be disposed to believe
him to be the Messiah : and though they, with others,
expected a temporal kingdom on earth, might yet rest
satisfied in the truth of their master (who had honoured
them with being near his person) that it would come,
without being too inquisitive after the time, manner, or
seat of his kingdom, as men of letters, more studied in
their rabbins, or men of business, more versed in the
world, would have been forward to have been. Men,
great or wise in knowledge, or ways of the world, would
hardly have been kept from prying more narrowly into
his design and conduct ; or from questioning him about
the ways and measures he would take, for ascending
the throne ; and what means were to be used towards it,
and when they should in earnest set about it. Abler
men, of higher births or thoughts, would hardly have
been hindered from whispering, at least to their friends
and relations, that their master was the Messiah ; and
that, though he concealed himself to a fit opportunity,
and until things were ripe for it, yet they should, ere
long, see him break out of his obscurity, cast off the
cloud, and declare himself, as he was, Ring of Israel.
But the ignorance and lowness of these good, poor men,
made them of another temper. They went along, in an
implicit trust on him, punctually keeping to his com
mands, and not exceeding his commission. When he
sent them to preach the gospel, he bid them preach
" the kingdom of God " to be at hand ; and that they
did, without being more particular than he had ordered,
or mixing their own prudence with his commands, to
promote the kingdom of the Messiah. They preached
it, without giving, or so much as intimating that their
master was he : which men of another condition, and
an higher education, would scarce have forborne to have
done. When he asked them, who they thought him

G 2

84 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

to be ; and Peter answered, " The Messiah, the Son of
" God/' Matt. xvi. 16, he plainly shows by the follow
ing words, that he himself had not told them so ; and
at the same time, ver. 20. forbids them to tell this their
opinion of him to any body. How obedient they were
to him in this, we may not only conclude from the si
lence of the evangelists concerning any such thing, pub
lished by them any-where before his death ; but from the
exact obedience three of them paid to a like command
of his. He takes Peter, James, and John, into a moun
tain ; and there Moses and Elias coming to him, he is
transfigured before them, Matt. xvii. 9. He charges
them,, saying, " See that ye tell no man what ye have
" seen, until the Son of man shall be risen from the dead."
And St. Luke tells us, what punctual observers they were
of his orders in this case, chap. ix. 36, " They kept it
" close, and told no man in those days, any of those
" things which they had seen."

Whether twelve other men, of quicker parts, and of
a station or breeding, which might have given them any
opinion of themselves, or their own abilities, would have
been so easily kept from meddling, beyond just what was
prescribed them, in a matter they had so much interest
in ; and have said nothing of what they might, in hu
man prudence, have thought would have contributed to
their master's reputation, and made way for his advance
ment to his kingdom ; I leave to be considered. And
it may suggest matter of meditation, whether St. Paul
was not for this reason, by his learning, parts, and
warmer temper, better fitted for an apostle after, than
during our Saviour's ministry : and therefore, though a
chosen vessel, was not by the divine wisdom called, until
after Christ's resurrection.

I offer this only as a subject of magnifying the ad
mirable contrivance of the divine wisdom, in the whole
work of our redemption, as far as we are able to trace
it, by the footsteps which God hath made visible to hu
man reason. For though it be as easy to omnipotent
power to do all things by an immediate over-ruling will,,
and so to make any instruments work, even contrary to

as delivered in the Scriptures. 85

their nature, in subserviency to his ends ; yet his wis
dom is not usually at the expence of miracles, (if I may
so say,) but only in cases that require them, for the evi
dencing of some revelation or mission to be from him.
He does constantly (unless where the confirmation of
some truth requires it otherwise) bring about his pur
poses by means operating according to their natures. If
it were not so, the course and evidence of things would
be confounded, miracles would lose their name and
force ; and there could be no distinction between na
tural and supernatural.

There had been no room left to see and admire the
wisdom, as well as innocence of our Saviour, if he had
rashly every-where exposed himself to the fury of the
jews, and had always been preserved by a miraculous
suspension of their malice, or a miraculous rescuing
him out of their hands. It was enough for him once
to escape from the men of Nazareth, who were going
to throw him down a precipice, for him never to preach
to them again. Our Saviour had multitudes that fol
lowed him for the loaves ; who barely seeing the mira
cles that he did, would have made him king. If to the
tairacles he did, he had openly added, in express words,
that he was the Messiah, and the king they expected
to deliver them, he would have had more followers,
and warmer in the cause, and readier to set him up at
the head of a tumult. These indeed God, by a mira
culous influence, might have hindered from any such
attempt : but then posterity could not have believed,
that the nation of the jews did, at that time, expect
the Messiah, their king and deliverer ; or that Jesus,
who declared himself to be that king and deliverer,
showed any miracles amongst them, to convince them
of it ; or did any thing worthy to make him be cre
dited or received. If he had gone about preaching to
the multitude, which he drew after him, that he was
the " Messiah, the king of Israel," and this had been
evidenced to Pilate ; God could indeed, by a superna
tural influence upon his mind, have made Pilate pro
nounce him innocent, and not condemn him as a male
factor, who had openly for three years together, preached

86 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

sedition to the people, and endeavoured to persuade
them, that he was " the Messiah, their king-," of the
royal blood of David, come to deliver them. But then I
ask, Whether posterity would not either have suspected
the story, or that some art had been used to gain that
testimony from Pilate ? Because he could not (for no
thing) have been so favourable to Jesus, as to be willing
to release so turbulent and seditious a man ; to declare
him innocent, and to cast the blame and guilt of his
death, as unjust, upon the envy of the jews.

But now, the malice of the chief priests, scribes and
pharisees ; the headiness of the mob, animated with
hopes, and raised with miracles ; Judas's treachery, and
Pilate's care of his government, and of the peace of his
province, all working naturally as they should ; Jesus,
by the admirable wariness of his carriage, and an ex
traordinary wisdom, visible in his whole conduct ; wea
thers all these difficulties, does the work he comes for,
uninterruptedly goes about preaching his full appointed
time, sufficiently manifests himself to be the Messiah,
in all the particulars the scriptures had foretold of him ;
and when his hour is come, suffers death : but is ac
knowledged, both by Judas that betrayed, and Pilate
that condemned him, to die innocent. For, to use his
own words, Luke xxiv. 46, " Thus it is written, and thus
" it behoved the Messiah to suffer." And of his whole
conduct we have a reason and clear resolution in those
words to St. Peter, Matt. xxvi. 53, " Thinkest thou
" that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall
" presently give me more than twelve legions of angels ?
" But how then shall the scripture be fulfilled, that thus
" it must be?"

Having this clew to guide us, let us now observe, how
our Saviour's preaching and conduct comported with it
in the last scene of his life. How cautious he had been
in the former part of his ministry,, we have already ob
served. We never find him to use the name of the Mes
siah but once, until he now came to Jerusalem, this last
passover. Before this, his preaching and miracles were
less at Jerusalem) where he used to make but very short
stays) than any-where else. But now he comes six days

as delivered in the Scriptures. 87

before the feast, and is every day in the temple teach
ing; and there publicly heals the blind and the lame,
in the presence of the scribes, pharisees, and chief
priests. The time of his ministry drawing- to an end, and
his hour coming, he cared not how much the chief
priests, elders, rulers, and the sanhedrim, were provoked
against him by his doctrine and miracles : he was as
open and bold in his preaching, and doing the works of
the Messiah now at Jerusalem, and in the sight of the
rulers, and of all the people ; as he had been before
cautious and reserved there, and careful to be little taken
notice of in that place, and not to come in their way
more than needs. All that he now took care of was,
not what they should think of him, or design against
him, (for he knew they would seize him,) but to say or do
nothing that might be a just matter of accusation against
him, or render him criminal to the governor. But, as
for the grandees of the Jewish nation, he spares them
not, but sharply now reprehends their miscarriages
publicly in the temple ; where he calls them more than
once, " hypocrites ;" as is to be seen. Matt, xxiii. And
concludes all with no softer a compellation than " ser-
" pents," and " a generation of vipers."

After this severe reproof of the scribes and pharisees,
being retired with his disciples into the " Mount of
<e Olives " over against the temple, and there foretelling
the destruction of it ; his disciples ask him, Matt. xxiv.
3, &c. " When it should be, and what should be the
" sign of his coming?" He says, to them, " Take heed
" that no man deceive you : for many shall come in my
" name/' (i. e. taking on them the name and dignity of
the Messiah, which is only mine,) saying, " I am the
" Messiah, and shall deceive many." But be not you by
them misled, nor by persecution driven away from this
fundamental truth, that I am the Messiah : " for many
** shall be scandalized," and apostatize ; " but he that
" endures to the end, the same shall be saved : and this
" gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the
" world:" i. e. the good news of me, the Messiah, and
my kingdom, shall be spread through the world. This
was the great and only point of belief they were warned

88 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

to stick to ; and this is inculcated again, ver. 23 — 26,
and Mark xiii. 21 — 23, with this emphatical application
to them, in both these evangelists, " Behold, I have told
" you beforehand ; remember, you are forewarned."

This was in answer to the apostles inquiry, concern
ing his " coming, and the end of the world," ver. 3.
For so we translate TVS erumXsiW tS aluvog . We must un
derstand the disciples here to put their question, accord
ing to the notion and way of speaking of the jews. For
they had two worlds, as we translate it, o vw alw, xou o
p&Xuv cawi/; " the present world," and the "world to come."
The kingdom of God, as they called it, or the time of the
Messiah, they called o ptxxw ouuv9 " the world to come,"
which they believed was to put an end to " this world ;"
and that then the just should be raised from the dead, to
enjoy in that " new world" a happy eternity, with those
of the Jewish nation, who should be then living.

These two things, viz. the visible and powerful ap
pearance of his kingdom, and the end of the world,
being confounded in the apostles question, our Saviour
does not separate them, nor distinctly reply to them
apart; but, leaving the inquirers in the common opi
nion, answers at once concerning his coming to take
vengeance on the Jewish nation, and put an end to their
church worship and commonwealth ; which was their
o vuv ouw, " present world," which they counted should
last till the Messiah came ; and so it did, and then had
an end put to it. And to this he joins his last coming
to judgment, in the glory of his Father, to put a final
end to this world, and all the dispensation belonging
to the posterity of Adam upon earth. This joining
them together, made his answer obscure, and hard to be
understood by them then ; nor was it safe for him to
speak plainer of his kingdom, and the destruction of
Jerusalem ; unless he had a mind to be accused for hav
ing designs against the government. For Judas was
amongst them : and whether no other but his apostles
were comprehended under the name of " his disciples,"
who were with him at this time, one cannot determine.
Our Saviour, therefore, speaks of his kingdom in no
other style, but that which he had all along hitherto

as delivered in the Scriptures. 89

used, viz. " the kingdom of God," Luke xxi. 31,
" When you see these things come to pass, know ye
" that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand." And
continuing on his discourse with them, he has the same
expression, Matt. xxv. 1, " Then the kingdom of
" heaven shall be like unto ten virgins." At the end of
the following parable of the talents, he adds, ver. 31,
" When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and
" all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon
" the throne of his glory. And before him shall be
" gathered all the nations. And he shall set the sheep
" on his right hand, and the goats on his left. Then
" shall the KING say," &c. Here he describes to his
disciples the appearance of his kingdom, wherein he
will show himself a king in glory upon his throne; but
this in such a way, and so remote, and so unintelligible
to an heathen magistrate ; that, if it had been alleged
against him, it would have seemed rather the dream of
a crazy brain, than the contrivance of an ambitious or
dangerous man, designing against the government : the
way of expressing what he meant, being in the pro
phetic style, which is seldom so plain as to be under
stood, till accomplished. It is plain, that his disciples
themselves comprehended not what kingdom he here
spoke of, from their question to him after his resurrec
tion, " Wilt thou at this time restore again the king-
" dom unto Israel?"

Having finished these discourses, he takes order for
the passover, and eats it with his disciples ; and at sup
per tells them, that one of them should betray him ;
and adds, John xiii. 19, " I tell it you now, before it
" come, that when it is come to pass, you may know
" that I am." He does not say out, " the Messiah;"
Judas should not have that to say against him, if he
would; though that be the sense in which he uses this
expression, iyu ilpi, " I am," more than once. And
that this is the meaning of it, is clear from Mark xii. 6,
Luke xxi. 8. In both which evangelists the words are,
" For many shall come in my name, saying, lyu el pi,
" 1 am ;" the meaning whereof we shall find explained
in the parallel place of St. Matthew, chap. xxiv. 5,

90 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" For many shall come in my name, saying, ty
" o Xptro?j I am the Messiah." Here, in this place of
John xiii. Jesus foretels what should happen to him,
viz. that he should be betrayed by Judas ; adding this
prediction to the many other particulars of his death
and suffering, which he had at other times foretold to
them. And here he tells them the reason of these his
predictions, viz. that afterwards they might be a con
firmation to their faith. And what was it that he would
have them believe, and be confirmed in the belief of?
Nothing but this, on iyu> i\pi o X.girog, " that he was the
" Messiah." The same reason he gives, John xiv. 28,
" You have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and
" come again unto you : and now I have told you, be-
" fore it comes to pass, that when it comes to pass, ye
" might believe."

When Judas had left them, and was gone out, he
talks a little freer to them of his glory and his king
dom, than ever he had done before. For now he speaks
plainly of himself, and of his kingdom, John xiii. 31,
" Therefore when he [Judas] was gone out, Jesus said,
" Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is also glo-
" rified in him. And, if God be glorified in him, God
" shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straitway
" glorify him." And Luke xxii. 29, " And I will
" appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath
" appointed unto me ; that ye may eat and drink with
" me at my table, in my kingdom." Though he has
every-where, all along through his ministry, preached
the " gospel of the kingdom," and nothing else but
that and repentance, and the duties of a good life : yet
it has been always " the kingdom of God," and " the
" kingdom of heaven:" and I do not remember, that
" any-where, till now, he uses any such expression, as
" my kingdom." But here now he speaks in the first
person, " I will appoint you a kingdom," and, " in my
" kingdom :" and this we see is only to the eleven, now
Judas was gone from them.

With these eleven, whom he was just now leaving, he
has a long discourse, to comfort them for the loss of
him ; and to prepare them for the persecution of the

as delivered in the Scriptures. 9l

world, and to exhort them to keep his commandments,
and to love one another. And here one may expect all
the articles of faith should be laid down plainly, if any
thing else were required of them to believe, but what
he had taught them, and they believed already, viz.
" That he was the Messiah." John xiv. 1, " Ye be-
" lieve in God, believe also in me." Ver. 29, " I have
" told you before it come to pass, that when it is
" come to pass, ye may believe." It is believing on
him without any thing else. John xvi. 31, " Jesus an-
" swered them. Do ye now believe ? " This was in
answer to their profession, ver. 30, " Now are we sure
" that thou knowest all things, and needest not that
" any man should ask thee : by this we believe that thou
" earnest forth from God."

John xvii. 20, " Neither pray I for these alone, but
" for them also which shall believe on me through their
" word." All that is spoke of believing, in this his
last sermon to them, is only " believing on him," or
believing that " he came from God ; " which was no
other than believing him to be the Messiah.

Indeed, John xiv. 9, our Saviour tells Philip, " He
" that hath seen me, hath seen the Father." And adds,
ver. 10, " Believest thou not that I am in the Father,
" and the Father in me ? The words that I speak unto
" you, I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwell-
" eth in me, he doth the works." Which being in
answer to Philip's wrords, ver. 9, " Show us the Father,"
seem to import thus much : " No man hath seen God
" at any time," he is known only by his works. And
that he is my Father, and I the Son of God, i. e. the
Messiah, you may know by the works I have done ;
which it is impossible I could do of myself, but by the
union I have with God my Father. For that by
being " in God," and " God in him," he signifies such
an union with God, that God operates in and by him,
appears not only by the words above cited out of ver. 10
(which can scarce otherwise be made coherent sense),
but also from the same phrase, used again by our Saviour
presently after, ver. 20, " At that day/' viz. after his
resurrection, when they should see him again, "you shall

92 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" know that I am in the Father, and you in me, and I
" in you ; " i. e. by the works that I shall enable you to
do, through a power I have received from the Father :
which whosoever sees me do, must acknowledge the Fa
ther to be in me ; and whosoever sees you do. must ac
knowledge me to be in you. And therefore he says,
ver. 12, " Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believ-
" eth on me, the works that I do shall he do also, be-
" cause I go unto my Father." Though I go away,
yet I shall be in you, who believe in me ; and ye shall
be enabled to do miracles also, for the carrying on of my
kingdom, as I have done ; that it may be manifested to
others, that you are sent by me, as I have evidenced to
you, that I am sent by the Father. And hence it is
that he says, in the immediately preceding ver. 11,
" Believe me, that I am in the Father, and the Father
" in me ; if not, believe me for the sake of the works
" themselves." Let the works that I have done convince
you, that I am sent by the Father ; that he is with me,
and that I do nothing but by his will ; and by virtue of
the union I have with him ; and that consequently I am
the Messiah, who am anointed, sanctified, and separated
by the Father, to the work for which he sent me.

To confirm. them in this faith, and to enable them to
do such works as he had done, he promises them the
Holy Ghost, John xiv. 25, 26. " These things I have
" said unto you, being yet present with you." But
when I am gone, " The Holy Ghost, the Paraclet,"
(which may signify Monitor, as well as Comforter, or
Advocate,) " which the Father shall send you in my
" name, he shall show you all things, and bring to your
" remembrance all things which I have said." So that
considering all that I have said, and laying it together,
and comparing it with what you shall see come to pass ;
you may be more abundantly assured, that I am the
Messiah ; and fully comprehend, that I have done and
suffered all things foretold of the Messiah, and that
were to be accomplished and fulfilled by him, according
to the scriptures. But be not filled with grief, that I leave
you, John xvi. 7, " It is expedient for you, that I go
" away ; for if I go not away, the Paraclet will not

as delivered in the Scriptures. 93

<tf come unto you." One reason why, if he went not away,
the Holy Ghost could not come, we may gather from
what has been observed,, concerning the prudent and
wary carriage of our Saviour all through his ministry,
that he might not incur death with the least suspicion r
of a malefactor. And therefore, though his disciples
believed him to be the Messiah, yet they neither under
stood it so well, nor were so well confirmed in the belief
of it, as after that, he being crucified and risen again,
they had received the Holy Ghost ; and with the gifts
of the Holy Spirit, a fuller and clearer evidence and
knowledge that he was the Messiah. They then were
enlightened to see how his kingdom was such as the
scriptures foretold ; though not such as they, till then,
had expected. And now this knowledge and assurance,
received from the Holy Ghost, was of use to them after
his resurrection ; when they could now boldly go about,
and openly preach, as they did, that Jesus was the Mes
siah ; confirming that doctrine by the miracles which
the Holy Ghost empowered them to do. But till he
was dead and gone, they could not do this. Their go
ing about openly preaching, as they did after his resur
rection, that Jesus was the Messiah, and doing miracles
every-where, to make it good, would not have consisted
with that character of humility, peace and innocence,
which the Messiah was to sustain, if they had done it
before his crucifixion. For this would have drawn upon
him the condemnation of a malefactor, either as a stirrer
of sedition against the public peace, or as a pretender
to the kingdom of Israel. Hence we see, that they,
who before his death preached only the " gospel of
" the kingdom ; " that " the kingdom of God was at
" hand ; " as soon as they had received the Holy Ghost,
after his resurrection, changed their style, and every
where in express words declare, that Jesus is the Mes
siah, that King which was to come. This, the following
words here in St. John xvi. 8 — 14, confirm ; where he
goes on to tell them, " And when he is come, he will
" convince the world of sin ; because they believed not
" on me." Your preaching then, accompanied with
miracles, by the assistance of the Holy Ghost, shall be a

94 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

conviction to the world, that the jews sinned in not be
lieving me to be the Messiah. " Of righteousness," or
justice ; " because I go to my Father, and ye see me no
" more." By the same preaching and miracles you shall
confirm the doctrine of my ascension ; and thereby con
vince the world, that I was that just one, who am, there
fore, ascended to the Father into heaven, where no un
just person shall enter. " Of judgment ; because the
" prince of this world is judged." And by the same
assistance of the Holy Ghost ye shall convince the world,
that the devil is judged or condemned by your casting
of him out, and destroying his kingdom, and his wor
ship, where-ever you preach. Our Saviour adds, " I
<e have yet many things to say unto you, but you
" cannot bear them now." They were yet so full of a
temporal kingdom, that they could not bear the dis
covery of what kind of kingdom his was, nor what a
king he was to be : and therefore he leaves them to the
coming of the Holy Ghost, for a farther and fuller dis
covery of himself, and the kingdom of the Messiah ; for
fear they should be scandalized in him, and give up the
hopes they now had in him, and forsake him. This
he tells them, ver. 1, of this xvith chapter: " These
" things I have said unto you, that you may not be
" scandalized." The last thing he had told them^ be
fore his saying this to them, we find in the last verses
of the preceding chapter : " When the Paraclet is come,
" the Spirit of truth, he shall witness concerning me."
He shall show you who I am, and witness it to the
world ; and then, " Ye also shall bear witness, because
*4 ye have been with me from the beginning." He
shall call to your mind what I have said and done, that
ye may understand it, and know, and bear witness con
cerning me. And again here, John xvi. after he had
told them they could not bear what he had more to say,
he adds, ver. 13, " Howbeit, when the Spirit of truth
" is come, he will guide you into all truth ; and he will
'* show you things to come' : he shall glorify me." By
the Spirit, when he comes, ye shall be fully instructed
concerning me ; and though you cannot yet, from what
I have said to you, clearly comprehend my kingdom

as delivered in the Scriptures. 95

and glory, yet he shall make it known to you wherein
it consists : and though I am now in a mean state, and
ready to be given up to contempt, torment, and death,
so that ye know not what to think of it ; yet the Spirit,
when he comes, " shall glorify me," and fully satisfy
you of rny power and kingdom ; and that I sit on the
right hand of God, to order all things for the good and
increase of it, till I come again at the last day, in the
fulness of glory.

Accordingly, the apostles had a full and clear sight
and persuasion of this,, after they had received the Holy
Ghost ; and they preached it every-where boldly and
openly, without the least remainder of doubt or uncer
tainty. But that, even so late as this, they understood
not his death and resurrection, is evident from ver. 17,
18, " Then said some of his disciples among themselves,
" What is it that he saith unto us ; A little while, and
" ye shall not see me ; and again, a little while, and ye
" shall see me ; and because I go to the Father ? They
" said therefore, What is this that he saith, A little
" while ? We know not what he saith." Upon which
he goes on to discourse to them of his death and resur
rection, and of the power they should have of doing mi
racles. But all this he declares to them in a mystical
and involved way of speaking : as he tells them himself,
ver. 25, " These things have I spoken to you in pro-
" verbs ; " i. e. in general, obscure, ^enigmatical, or
figurative terms (all which, as well as allusive apolo
gues, the jews called proverbs or parables). Hitherto
my declaring of myself to you hath been obscure, and
with reserve : and I have not spoken of myself to you in
plain and direct words, because ye " could not bear it."
A Messiah, and not a King, you could not understand :
and a King living in poverty and persecution, and dy
ing the death of a slave and malefactor upon a cross ;
you could not put together. And I had told you in
plain words, that I was the Messiah, and given you a
direct commission to preach to others, that I professedly
owned myself to be the Messiah, you and they would
have been ready to have made a commotion, to have set
me upon the throne of my father David, and to fight for

96 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

me; and that your Messiah, your King, in whom are
your hopes of a kingdom, should not be delivered up
into the hands of his enemies, to he put to death ; and
of this Peter will instantly give you a proof. But " the
" time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you
" in parables ; but I shall show unto you plainly of the
" Father." My death and resurrection, and the coming
of the Holy Ghost, will speedily enlighten you, and then
I shall make you know the will and design of my Fa
ther ; what a kingdom I am to have, and by what means,
and to what end, ver. 27. And this the Father himself
will show unto you : " For he loveth you, because ye
" have loved me, and have believed that I came out
" from the Father." Because ye have believed that I
am " the Son of God, the Messiah;" that he hath
anointed and sent me ; though it hath not yet been fully
discovered to you, what kind of kingdom it shall be, nor
by what means brought about. And then our Saviour,
without being asked, explaining to them what he had
said, and making them understand better what before
they stuck at, and complained secretly among them
selves that they understood not ; they thereupon declare,
ver. 30, " Now are we sure that thou knowest all things,
" and needest not that any man should ask thee." It is
plain, thou knowest men's thoughts and doubts before
they ask. " By this we believe that thou earnest forth
" from God. Jesus answered, Do ye now believe?"
Notwithstanding that you now believe, that I came from
God, and am the Messiah, sent by him: " Behold, the
" hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scat-
" tered ;" and as it is Matth. xxvi. 31, and " shall all
" be scandalized in me.53 What it is to be scandalized
in him, we may see by what followed hereupon, if that
which he says to St. Peter, Mark xiv. did not suffi
ciently explain it.

This I have been the more particular in ; that it may
be seen, that in this last discourse to his disciples (where
he opened himself more than he had hitherto done ; and
where, if any thing more was required to make them
believers than what they already believed, we might
have expected they should have heard of it) there were

as delivered in the Scriptures. 97

no new articles proposed to them, but what they be
lieved before, viz. that he was the Messiah, the Son of
God, sent from the Father ; though of his manner of
proceeding, and his sudden leaving of the world, and
some few particulars, he made them understand some
thing more than they did before. But as to the main
design of the gospel, viz. that he had a kingdom, that
he should be put to death, and rise again, and ascend
into heaven to his Father, and come again in glory to
judge the world ; this he had told them : and so had
acquainted them with the great counsel of God, in send
ing him the Messiah, and omitted nothing that was ne
cessary to be known or believed in it. And so he tells
them himself, John xv. 1,5, " Henceforth I call you
" not servants : for the servant knoweth not what his
" Lord does : but I have called you friends ; for ALL
" THINGS that I have heard of my Father, I have made
" known unto you ; " though perhaps ye do not so
fully comprehend them, as you will shortly, when I am
risen and ascended.

To conclude all, in his prayer, which shuts up this
discourse, he tells the Father, what he had made known
to his apostles ; the result whereof we have John xvii. 8,
" I have given unto them the words which thou gavest
" me, and they have received them, and THEY HAVE

" BELIEVED THAT THOU DIDST SEND ME." Which is,

in effect, that he was the Messiah promised and sent by
God. And then he prays for them, and adds, ver.
20, 21, " Neither pray I for these alone, but for them
" also who shall believe on me through their word."
What that word was, through which others should be
lieve in him, we have seen in the preaching of the apo
stles, all through the history of the Acts, viz. this one
great point, that Jesus was the Messiah. The apostles,
he says, ver. 25, " know that thou hast sent me ; " i. e.
are assured that I am the Messiah. And in ver. 21 and
23, he prays, " That the world may believe" (which,
ver. 23, is called knowing) " that thou has sent me."
So that what Christ would have believed by his disci
ples, we may see by this his last prayer for them, when

H

98 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

he was leaving the world, as by what he preached whilst

he was in it.

And, as a testimony of this, one of his last actions,
even when he was upon the cross, was to confirm his
doctrine, by giving* salvation to one of the thieves that
wras crucified with him, upon his declaration that he
believed him to be the Messiah : for so much the words
of his request imported, when he said, <: Remember me,
" Lord, when thou comest into thy kingdom," Luke
xxiii. 42. To which Jesus replied, ver. 43, " Verily,
" I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in
" paradise." An expression very remarkable : for as
Adam, by sin, lost paradise, i. e. a state of happy im
mortality ; here the believing thief, through his faith in
Jesus the Messiah, is promised to be put in paradise,
and so re-instated in an happy immortality.

Thus our Saviour ended his life. And what he did
after his resurrection, St. Luke tells us, Acts i. 3, That
he showed himself to the apostles, " forty days, speak-
" ing things concerning the kingdom of God." This
was what our Saviour preached in the whole course of
his ministry, before his passion : and no other mysteries
of faith does he now discover to them after his resurrec
tion. All he says, is concerning the kingdom of God ;
and what it was he said concerning that, we shall see
presently out of the other evangelists ; having first only
taken notice, that when now they asked him, ver. 6,
" Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the king-
" dom of Israel ? He said unto them, ver. 7, It is not
" for you to know the times and the seasons, which the
" Father hath put in his own power : but ye shall re-
*' ceive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon
" you ; and ye shall be witnesses unto me, unto the
" utmost parts of the earth." (iTheir great business was
to be witnesses to Jesus, of his life, death, resurrection,
and ascension ; which, put together, were undeniable
proofs of his being the Messiah. This was what they
were to preach, and what he said to them, concerning
the kingdom of God ; as will appear by what is record
ed of it in the other evangelists.

as delivered in the Scriptures. 99

When on the day of his resurrection he appeared to
the two going to Emmaus, Luke xxiv. they declare,
ver. 21, what his disciples faith in him was : " But we
" trusted that it had been he that should have redeemed
" Israel : " i. e. we believed that he was the Messiah,
come to deliver the nation of the jews. Upon this,
Jesus tells them they ought to believe him to be the
Messiah, notwithstanding what had happened: nay,
they ought, by his sufferings and death, to be confirmed
in that faith, that he was the Messiah. And ver. 26, 27,
" Beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he ex-
" pounded unto them, in all the scriptures, the things
" concerning himself, " how, " that the Messiah ought
" to have suffered these things, and to have entered into
" his glory." Now he applies the prophecies of the
Messiah to himself, which we read not, that he did ever
do before his passion. And afterwards appearing to the
eleven, Luke xxiv. 36, he said unto them,, ver. 44 — 47,
" These are the words, which I spake unto you, while
" I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled
" which are written in the law of Moses, and in the
" prophets, and in the psalms concerning me. Then
" opened he their understanding, that they might un-
" derstand the scripture, and said unto them : Thus it
" is written, and thus it behoved the Messiah to suffer,
" and to rise from the dead the third day ; and that re-
" pentance and remission of sins should be preached in
" his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."
Here we see what it was he had preached to them, though
not in so plain open words before his crucifixion ; and
what it is he now makes them understand ; and what it
was that was to be preached to all nations, viz. That he
was the Messiah that had suffered, and rose from the
dead the third day, and fulfilled all things that were
written in the Old Testament concerning the Messiah ;
and that those who believed this, and repented, should
receive remission of their sins, through this faith in him.
Or, as St. Mark has it, chap. xvi. 15, " Go into all the
" world, and preach the gospel to every creature ; he
" that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved ; but
" he that believeth not, shall be damned/' ver, 16.

H g~

100 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

What the " gospel," or " good news," was, we have
showed already, viz. The happy tidings of the Messiah
being come. Ver. 20, And " they went forth and preached
" every -where, the Lord working with them, and con-
" firming the word with signs following." What the
" word " was which they preached, and the Lord con
firmed with miracles, we have seen already, out of the
history of their Acts. I have already given an account
of their preaching every-where, as it is recorded in the
Acts, except some few places, where the kingdom of
" the Messiah " is mentioned under the name of " the
" kingdom of God ; " which I forbore to set down, till
I had made it plain out of the evangelists, that that was
no other but the kingdom of the Messiah.

It may be seasonable therefore, now, to add to those
sermons we have formerly seen of St. Paul, (wherein he
preached no other article of faith, but that Jesus was
" the Messiah," the King, who being risen from the
dead, now reigneth, and shall more publicly manifest
his kingdom, in judging the world at the last day,) what
farther is left upon record of his preaching. Acts xix.
8, at Ephesus, " Paul went into the synagogues, and
" spake boldly for the space of three months ; disputing
" and persuading, concerning the kingdom of God."
And, Acts xx. 25, at Miletus he thus takes leave of the
elders of Ephesus : "And now, behold, I know that ye
" all, among whom I have gone preaching the king-
" dom of God, shall see my face no more." What this
preaching the kingdom of God was, he tells you,
ver. 20, 21, " I have kept nothing back from you,
66 which was profitable unto you ; but have showed you,
" and have taught you publickly, and from house to
" house ; testifying both to the jews, and to the Greeks,
" repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord
" Jesus Christ." And so again, Acts xxviii. 23, 24,
" When they [the jews at Rome] had appointed him
16 [Paul] a day, there came many to him into his lodg-
" ing ; to whom he expounded and testified the king-
" dom of God ; persuading them concerning Jesus,
" both out of the law of Moses, and out of the pro-
" phets, from morning to evening. And some believed

as delivered in the Scriptures. 101

" the things which were spoken, and some believed not."
And the history of the Acts is concluded with this ac
count of St. Paul's preaching : " And Paul dwelt two
" whole years in his own hired house, and received all
" that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of
" God, and teaching those things which concern the
" Lord Jesus the Messiah." We may therefore here
apply the same conclusion to the history of our Saviour,
writ by the evangelists, and to the history of the apos
tles, writ in the Acts, which St. John does to his own
gospel, chap. xx. 30, 31, " Many other signs did Jesus
" before his disciples ; " and in many other places the
apostles preached the same doctrine, " which are not
" written" in these books ; " but these are written that
" you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son
" of God ; and that believing you may have life in his

name."

What St. John thought necessary and sufficient to be
believed, for the attaining eternal life, he here tells us.
And this not in the first dawning of the gospel ; when,
perhaps, some will be apt to think less was required to
be believed, than after the doctrine of faith, and mys
tery of salvation, was more fully explained, in the
epistles writ by the apostles, for it is to be remembered,
that St. John says this, not as soon as Christ was
ascended ; for these words, with the rest of St. John's
gospel, were not written till many years after not only
the other gospels, and St. Luke's history of the Acts,
but in all appearance, after all the epistles writ by the
other apostles. So that above threescore years after our
Saviour's passion (for so long after, both Epiphanius and
St. Jerom assure us this gospel was written) St. John
knew nothing else required to be believed, for the at- f
taining of life, but that " Jesus is the Messiah, the Son
" of God."

To this, it is likely, it will be objected by some, that
to believe only that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, is
but an historical, and not a justifying, or saving faith.

To which I answer, That I allow to the makers of
systems and their followers to invent and use what dis
tinctions they please, and to call things by what names

102 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

they think fit. But I cannot allow to them, or to any
man, an authority to make a religion for me, or to alter
that which God hath revealed. And if they please to
call the believing that which our Saviour and his apos
tles preached, and proposed alone to be believed, an
historical faith ; they have their liberty. But they must
have a care, how they deny it to be a justifying or saving
faith, when our Saviour and his apostles have declared
it so to be ; and taught no other which men should re
ceive, and whereby they should be made believers unto
eternal life : unless they can so far make bold with our
Saviour, for the sake of their beloved systems,, as to say,
that he forgot what he came into the world for ; and
that he and his apostles did not instruct people right in
the way and mysteries of salvation. For that this is
the sole doctrine pressed and required to be believed
in the whole tenour of our Saviour's and his apostles
preaching, we have showed through the whole history
of the evangelists and the Acts. And I challenge them
to show that there was any other doctrine, upon their
assent to which, or disbelief of it, men were pronounced
believers or unbelievers ; and accordingly received into
the church of Christ, as members of his body ; as far as
mere believing, could make them so : or else kept out
of it. This was the only gospel-article of faith which
was preached to them. And if nothing else was preached
every-where, the apostle's argument will hold against
any other articles of faith to be believed under the gos
pel, Rom. x. 14, " How shall they believe that whereof
" they have not heard ? " For to preach any other doc
trines necessary to be believed, we do not find that any
body was sent.

Perhaps it will farther be urged, that this is not a
" saving faith ; " because such a faith as this the devils
may have, and it was plain they had ; for they believed
and declared " Jesus to be the Messiah." And St. James,
eh. ii. 19, tells us, " The devils believe and tremble ; "
and yet they shall not be saved. To which I answer, 1.
That they could not be saved by any faith, to whom it
was not proposed as a means of salvation, nor ever pro
mised to be counted for righteousness. This was an act

as delivered in the Scriptures* 103

of grace shown only to mankind. ^God dealt so favour
ably with the posterity of Adam, that if they would
believe Jesus to be the Messiah, the promised Ring and
Saviour, and perform what other conditions were re
quired of them by the covenant of grace ; God would
justify them, because of this belief. He would account
this faith to them for righteousness, and look on it as
making up the defects of their obedience ; which being
thus supplied, by what was taken instead of it, they
were looked on as just or righteous ; and so inherited
eternal life. But this favour shown to mankind, was
never offered to the fallen angels. They had no such
proposals made to them : and therefore, whatever of this
kind was proposed to men, it availed not devils, what
ever they performed of it. This covenant of grace was
never offered to them.

2. I answer ; that though the devils believed, yet
they could not be saved by the covenant of grace ; be
cause they performed not the other condition required
in it, altogether as necessary to be performed as this of
believing: and that is repentance. Repentance is as
absolute a condition of the covenant of grace as faith ;
and as necessary to be performed as that. John the
Baptist, who was to prepare the way for the Messiah,
" Preached the baptism of repentance for the remission
" of sins," Mark i. 4.

As John began his preaching with " Repent; for
" the kingdom of heaven is at hand," Mat. iii. & ; so
did our Saviour begin his, Matt. iv. 17, " From that
" time began Jesus to preach, and to say, Repent ; for
" the kingdom of heaven is at hand." Or, as St. Mark
has it in that parallel place, Mark i. 14, 15, " Now,
" after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into
** Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
" and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of
" God is at hand : repent ye, and believe the gospel."
This was not only the beginning of his preaching, but
the sum of all that he did preach ; viz. That men
should repent, and believe the good tidings which he
brought them ; that " the time was fulfilled " for the
coming of the Messiah. And this was what his apostles

104 The Reasonableness of Christianity.

preached, when he sent them out, Mark vi. 12, " And
" they, going out, preached that men should repent."
Believing Jesus to be the Messiah, and repenting, were
so necessary and fundamental parts of the covenant of
grace, that one of them alone is often put for both. For
here St. Mark mentions nothing but their preaching
repentance : as St. Luke, in the parallel place, chap. ix.
6, mentions nothing but their evangelizing, or preach
ing the good news of the kingdom of the Messiah : and
St. Paul often, in his epistles, puts faith for the whole
duty of a Christian. But yet the tenour of the gospel is
what Christ declares, Luke xii. 3, 5, " Unless ye re-
" pent, ye shall all likewise perish." And in the pa
rable of the rich man in hell, delivered by our Saviour,
Luke xvi. repentance alone is the means proposed, of
avoiding that place of torment, ver. 30, 31. And what
the tenour of the doctrine which should be preached to
the world should be, he tells his apostles, after his re
surrection, Luke xxiv. 27, viz. " That repentance and
" remission of sins " should be preached " in his name,"
who was the Messiah. And accordingly, believing Jesus
to be the Messiah, and repenting, was what the apostles
preached. So Peter began, Acts ii. 38, " Repent, and
" be baptized." These two things were required for
the remission of sins, viz. entering themselves in the
kingdom of God; and owning and professing them
selves the subjects of Jesus, whom they believed to be
the Messiah, and received for their Lord and King ; for
that was to be " baptized in his name :" baptism being
an initiating ceremony, known to the jews, whereby
those, who leaving heathenism, and professing a sub
mission to the law of Moses, were received into the
commonwealth of Israel. And so it was made use of
by our Saviour, to be that solemn visible act, whereby
those who believed him to be the Messiah, received him
as their king, and professed obedience to him, were
admitted as subjects into his kingdom : which, in the
gospel, is called " the kingdom of God ; " and in the
Acts and epistles, often by another name, viz. the
« Church."

The same St, Peter preaches again to the jews, Acts

as delivered in the Scriptures, 105

iii. 19, " Repent, and be converted, that your sins may
" be blotted out."

What this repentance was which the new covenant
required, as one of the conditions to be performed by
all those who should receive the benefits of that cove
nant ; is plain in the scripture, to be not only a sorrow
for sins past, but (what is a natural consequence of such
sorrow, if it be real) a turning from them into a new
and contrary life. And so they are joined together, Acts
iii. 19, " Repent and turn about;" or, as we render it,
" be converted." And Acts xxvi. 20, " Repent and
" turn to God."

And sometimes " turning about " is put alone to sig
nify repentance, Matt. xiii. 15, Luke xxii. 32, which
in other words is well expressed by " newness of life."
For it being certain that he, who is really sorry for his
sins, and abhors them, will turn from them, and forsake
them ; either of these acts, which have so natural a
connection one with the other, may be, and is often put
for both together. Repentance is an hearty sorrow for
our past misdeeds, and a sincere resolution and endea
vour, to the utmost of our power, to conform all our
actions to the law of God. So that repentance does not
consist in one single act of sorrow, (though that being
the first and leading act gives denomination to the
whole,) but in " doing works meet for repentance ;" in
a sincere obedience to the law of Christ, the remainder
of our lives. This was called for by John the Baptist,
the preacher of repentance, Matt. iii. 8, " Bring forth
" fruits meet for repentance." And by St. Paul here,
Acts xxvi. 20, " Repent and turn to God, and do works
" meet for repentance." There are works to follow
belonging to repentance, as well as sorrow for what is
past.

These two, faith and repentance, i. e. believing Jesus
tol>e the Messiah, and a good life, are the indispensable
conditions of the new covenant, to be performed by all
those who would obtain eternal life. (The reasonable
ness, or rather necessity of which, that we may the
better comprehend, we must a little look back to what
was said in the beginning.

106 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

Adam being the Son of God, and so St. Luke calls
him, chap. iii. 38, had this part also of the likeness and
image of his father, viz. that he was immortal. But
Adam, transgressing the command given him by his
heavenly Father, incurred the penalty ; forfeited that
state of immortality, and became mortal. After this,
Adam begot children : but they were " in his own
" likeness, after his own image ; " mortal, like their
father.

God nevertheless, out of his infinite mercy, willing
to bestow eternal life on mortal men, sends Jesus Christ
into the world ; who being conceived in the womb of a
virgin (that had not known man) by the immediate
power of God, was properly the Son of God ; according
to what the angel declared unto his mother, Luke i.
30 — 35, " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and
" the power of the Highest shall over-shadow thee :
" therefore also that holy thing, which shall be born of
" thee, shall be called the SON OF GOD." So that be
ing the Son of God, he was like the Father, immortal ;
as he tells us, John v. 26, " As the Father hath life in
" himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in
" himself."

And that immortality is a part of that image, wherein
those (who were the immediate sons of God, so as to
have no other father) were made like their father, ap
pears probable, not only from the places in Genesis
concerning Adam, above taken notice of, but seems to
me also to be intimated in some expressions, concerning
Jesus the Son of God, in the New Testament. Col. i.
15, he is called " the image of the invisible God." In
visible seems put in, to obviate any gross imagina
tion, that he (as images used to do) represented God in
any corporeal or visible resemblance. And there is far
ther subjoined, to lead us into the meaning of it, " The
" first-born of every creature ; " which is farther ex
plained, ver. 18, where he is termed " The first-born
" from the dead ; " thereby making out, and showing
himself to be the image of the invisible ; that death hath
no power over him ; but being the Son of God, and
not having forfeited that sonship by any transgression ;

(is delivered in the Scriptures.

was the heir of eternal life, as Adam should have been,
had he continued in his filial duty. In the same sense
the apostle seems to use the word image in other places,
viz. Rom. viii. 29, " Whom he did foreknow, he also
" did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his >?r
" Son, that he might be the first-born among many H3
" brethren." This image, to which they were con
formed, seems to be immortality and eternal life : for it
is remarkable, that in both these places, St. Paul speaks
of the resurrection ; and that Christ was " The first-born
" among many brethren ;" he being by birth the Son
of God, and the others only by adoption, as we see in
this same chapter ver. 15 — 17, " Ye have received the
" Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father;
" the Spirit itself bearing witness with our spirit, that
" we are the children of God. And if children, then
" heirs, and joint-heirs with Christ ; if so be that we
" suffer with him, that we may also be glorified toge-
" ther." And hence we see, that our Saviour vouch
safes to call those, who at the day of judgment are,
through him, entering into eternal life, his brethren ;
Matt. xxv. 40, " Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one
" of the least of these my brethren." May we not in
this find a reason, why God so frequently in the New
Testament, and so seldom, if at all, in the Old, is men
tioned under the single title of THE FATHER? And there
fore our Saviour says, Matt. xi. " No man knoweth the
" Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son
" will reveal him." God has now a son again in the
world, the first-born of many brethren, who all now,
by the Spirit of adoption, can say, Abba, Father. And
we, by adoption, being for his sake made his brethren,
and the sons of God, come to share in that inheritance,
which was his natural right; he being by birth the Son
of God : which inheritance is eternal life. And again,
ver. 23, " We groan within ourselves, waiting for the
" adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body ; "
whereby is plainly meant, the change of these frail
mortal bodies, into the spiritual immortal bodies at the
resurrection ; " When this mortal shall have put on
" immortality," 1 Cor. xv. 54 ; which in that chapter,

108 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

ver. 42 — 44, he farther expresses thus ; " So also is the
" resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption,
" it is raised in incorruption ; it is sown in dishonour,
" it is raised in glory ; it is sown in weakness, it is
" raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised
" a spiritual body," &c. To which he subjoins, ver.
49, " As we have born the image of the earthly," (i. e.
as we have been mortal, like earthy Adam, our father,
from whom we are descended, when he was turned out
of paradise,) " we shall also bear the image of the hea-
" venly ; " into whose sonship and inheritance being
adopted, we shall, at the resurrection, receive that
adoption we expect, " even the redemption of our bo-
*•' dies ; " and after his image, which is the image of
the Father, become immortal. Hear what he says
himself, Luke xx. 35, 36, " They who shall be ac-
*e counted worthy to obtain that world, and the resur-
" rection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given
" in marriage. Neither can they die any more ; for
" they are equal to the angels, and are the SONS OF
" GOD, being the sons of the resurrection." And he
that shall read St. Paul's arguing, Acts xiii. 32, 33,
will find that the great evidence that Jesus was the
" Son of God," was his resurrection. Then the image
of his Father appeared in him, when he visibly entered
into the state of immortality. For thus the apostle rea
sons, " We preach to you, how that the promise which
" was made to our fathers, God hath fulfilled the same
" unto us, in that he hath raised up Jesus again ; as it
" is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my
" Son, this day have I begotten thee."

This may serve a little to explain the immortality of
the sons of God, who are in this like their Father,
made after his image and likeness. But that our Saviour
was so, he himself farther declares, John x. 18, where
speaking of his life, he says, " No one taketh it from
" me, but I lay it down of myself; I have power to lay
" it down, and I have power to take it up again."
Which he could not have had, if he had been a mortal
man, the son of a man, of the seed of Adam ; or else had
by any transgression forfeited his life. " For the wages

as delivered in the Scriptures. 109

" of sin is death :" and he that hath incurred death for
his own transgression, cannot lay down his life for an
other, as our Saviour professes he did. For he was the
just one, Acts vii. 52, and xxii. 14, " Who knew no
" sin;" 2 Cor.v. 211, " Who did no sin, neither was guile
" found in his mouth." And thus, " As by man came
" death, so by man came the resurrection of the dead.
" For as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made
" alive."

For this laying down his life for others, our Saviour
tells us, John x. 17, " Therefore does my Father love
" me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it
" again." And this his obedience and suffering was re-
warded with a kingdom : which he tells us, Luke xxii.
" His Father had appointed unto him:" and which, it is
evident out of the epistle to the Hebrews, chap. xii. 2,
he had a regard to in his sufferings : " Who for the joy
" that was set before him, endured the cross, despising
" the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the
" throne of God." Which kingdom, given him upon
this account of his obedience, suffering, and death, he
himself takes notice of in these words, John xvii. 1 — 4,
" Jesus lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father,
" the hour is come: glorify thy Son, that thy Son also
" may glorify thee : as thou hast given him power over
" all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many
" as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that
" they may know thee the only true God, and Jesus,
" the Messiah, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified
" thee on earth : I have finished the work which thou
" gavest me to do." And St. Paul, in his epistle to the
Philippians, chap. ii. 8 — 11, " He humbled himself,
" and became obedient unto death, even the death of
" the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted
" him, and given him a name that is above every name ;
" that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of
" things in heaven, and things in earth, and things un-
" der the earth ; and that every tongue should confess,
" that Jesus Christ is Lord."

Thus God, we see, designed his Son Jesus Christ
a kingdom, an everlasting kingdom in heaven. But

110 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

though, " as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be
" made alive ; " and all men shall return to life again
at the last day ; yet all men having sinned, and thereby
" come short of the glory of God," as St. Paul assures
us, Rom. iii. 23, i. e. not attaining to the heavenly
kingdom of the Messiah, which is often called the glory
of God ; (as may be seen, Rom. v. 2, and xv. 7 ; and ii.
7; Matt. xvi. 27; Mark vii. 38. For no one who is
unrighteous, i. e. comes short of perfect righteousness,
shall be admitted into the eternal life of that kingdom ;
as is declared, 1 Cor. vi. 9, " The unrighteous shall not
" inherit the kingdom of God ; ") and death, the wages
of sin, being the portion of all those who had trans
gressed the righteous law of God ; the son of God would
in vain have come into the world to lay the founda
tions of a kingdom, and gather together a select people
out of the world, if, (they being found guilty at their
appearance before the judgment-seat of the righteous
Judge of all men at the last day,) instead of entrance
into eternal life in the kingdom he had prepared for
them, they should receive death, the just reward of sin
which every one of them wras guilty of; this second
death would have left him no subjects ; and instead of
those ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands
of thousands, there would not have been one left him to
sing praises unto his name, saying, " Blessing, and ho-
" nour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth
" on the throne, and unto the lamb for ever and ever."
God therefore, out of his mercy to mankind, and for
the erecting of the kingdom of his Son, and furnishing
it with subjects out of every kindred, and tongue, and
people, and nation ; proposed to the children of men,
that as many of them as would believe Jesus his Son
(whom he sent into the world) to be the Messiah, the
promised Deliverer; and would receive him for their
King and Ruler ; should have all their past sins, disobe
dience, and rebellion forgiven them : and if for the fu
ture they lived in a sincere obedience to his law, to
the utmost of their power; the sins of human frailty for
the time to come, as well as all those of their past
lives; should, for his Son's sake, because they gave

as delivered in the Scriptures. Ill

themselves up to him, to be his subjects, be forgiven
them : and so their faith, which made them be bap
tized into his name, (i. e. enrol themselves in the king
dom of Jesus the Messiah, and profess themselves his
subjects, and consequently live by the laws of his king
dom,) should be accounted to them for righteousness ;
i. e. should supply the defects of a scanty obedience in
the sight of God ; who, counting faith to them for righ
teousness, or complete obedience, did thus justify, or
make them just, and thereby capable of eternal life.

Now, that this is the faith for which God of his free
grace justifies smful man, (for "it is God alone that jus-
" tifieth," Rom. viii. 33, Rom. iii. 26,) we have already
showed, by observing through all the history of our Sa
viour and the apostles, recorded in the evangelists, and
in the Acts, what he and his apostles preached, and pro
posed to be believed. We shall show now, that besides
believing him to be the Messiah, their King, it was far
ther required, that those who would have the privilege,
advantage, and deliverance of his kingdom, should enter
themselves into it ; and by baptism being made deni
zens, and solemnly incorporated into that kingdom, live
as became subjects obedient to the laws of it. For if
they believed him to be the Messiah, their King, but
would not obey his laws, and would not have him to
reign over them ; they were but the greater rebels ; and
God would not justify them for a faith that did but in
crease their guilt, and oppose diametrically the king
dom and design of the Messiah ; " Who gave himself
" for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and
" purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good
" works," Titus ii. 14. An? therefore St. Paul tells the
Galatians, That that which availeth is faith ; but " faith
" working by love." And that faith without works, i. e.
the works of sincere obedience to the law and will of
Christ, is not sufficient for our justification, St. James
shows at large, chap. ii.

Neither, indeed, could it be otherwise ; for life, eter
nal life, being the reward of justice or righteousness
only, appointed by the righteous God (who is of purer
eyes than to behold iniquity) to those who only had no

112 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

taint or infection of sin upon them, it is impossible that
he should justify those who had no regard to justice at
all whatever they believed. This would have been to
encourage iniquity, contrary to the purity of his na
ture ; and to have condemned that eternal law of right,
which is holy, just, and good; of which no one precept
or rule is abrogated or repealed ; nor indeed can be,
whilst God is an holy, just, and righteous God, and man
a rational creature. The duties of that law, arising from
the constitution of his very nature, are of eternal obliga
tion ; nor can it be taken away or dispensed with,
without changing the nature of things, overturning the
measures of right and wrong, and thereby introducing
and authorizing irregularity, confusion, and disorder in
the world. Christ's coming into the world was not for
such an end as that ; but, on the contrary, to reform the
corrupt state of degenerate man ; and out of those who
would mend their lives, and bring forth fruit meet for
repentance, erect a new kingdom.

This is the law of that kingdom, as well as of all
mankind ; and that law, by which all men shall be
judged at the last day. Only those who have believed
Jesus to be the Messiah, and have taken him to be their
King, with a sincere endeavour after righteousness, in
obeying his law ; shall have their past sins not imputed
to them; and shall have that faith taken instead of
obedience, where frailty and weakness made them
transgress, and sin prevailed after conversion ; in those
who hunger and thirst after righteousness,, (or perfect
obedience,) and do not allow themselves in acts of dis
obedience and rebellion, against the laws of that king
dom they are entered into.

He did not expect, it is true, a perfect obedience, void
of slips and falls : he knew our make, and the weakness
of our constitution too well, and was sent with a supply
for that defect. Besides, perfect obedience was the righ
teousness of the law of works ; and then the reward
would be of debt, and not of grace ; and to such there
was no need of faith to be imputed to them for righ
teousness. They stood upon their own legs, were just
already, and needed no allowance to be made them for

as delivered in the Scriptures. 113

believing Jesus to be the Messiah, taking him for their
king, and becoming his subjects. But that Christ does
require obedience, sincere obedience, is evident from
the law he himself delivers (unless he can be supposed
to give and inculcate laws, only to have them disobey
ed) and from the sentence he will pass when he comes
to judge.

The faith required was, to believe Jesus to be the
Messiah, the Anointed : who had been promised by
God to the world. Among the jews (to whom the pro
mises and prophecies of the Messiah were more imme
diately delivered) anointing was used to three sorts of
persons, at their inauguration ; whereby they were set
apart to three great offices, viz. of priests, prophets, and
kings. Though these three offices be in holy writ at
tributed to our Saviour, yet I do not remember that he
any-where assumes to himself the title of a priest, or
mentions any thing relating to his priesthood ; nor does
he speak of his being a prophet but very sparingly, and
only once or twice, as it were by the by : but the gos
pel, or the good news of the kingdom of the Messiah, is
what he preaches every-where, and makes it his great
business to publish to the world. This he did not only
as most agreeable to the expectation of the jews, who
looked for the Messiah, chiefly as coming in power to
be their king and deliverer : but as it best answered the
chief end of his coming, which was to be a king, and,
as such, to be received by those who would be his sub
jects in the kingdom which he came to erect. And
though he took not directly on himself the title of king,
until he was in custody, and in the hands of Pilate ; yet
it is plain, " King" and " King of Israel," were the
familiar and received titles of the Messiah. See John
i. 50, Luke xix. 38, compared with Matt. xxi. 9 ; and
Mark xi. 9, John xii. 13, Matt. xxi. 5, Luke xxiii. 2,
compared with Matt, xxvii. 11 ; and John xviii. 33 — 37,
Mark xv. 12, compared with Matt, xxvii. 22, 42.

What those were to do, who believed him to be the
Messiah, and received him for their king, that they
might be admitted to be partakers with him of his
kingdom in glory, we shall best know by the laws he

i

114 The Reasonableness of Christianity 9

gives them, and requires them to obey ; and by the sen
tence which he himself will give, when sitting on his
throne they shall all appear at his tribunal, to receive
every one his doom from the mouth of this righteous
judge of all men.

What he proposed to his followers to be believed, we
have already seen, by examining his and his apostles
preaching, step by step, all through the history of the
four evangelists, and the Acts of the Apostles. The
same method will best arid plainest show us, whether he
required of those who believed him to be the Messiah,
any thing besides that faith, and what it was. For, he
being a king, we shall see by his commands what he
expects from his subjects : for, if he did not expect
obedience to them, his commands would be but mere
mockery ; and if there were no punishment for the
transgressors of them, his laws would not be the laws
of a king, and that authority to command, and power
to chastise the disobedient, but empty talk, without
force, and without influence.

We shall therefore from his injunctions (if any such
there be) see what he has made necessary to be per
formed, by all those who shall be received into eternal
life, in his kingdom prepared in the heavens. And in
this we cannot be deceived. What we have from his
own mouth, especially if repeated over and over again,
in different places and expressions, will be past doubt
and controversy. I shall pass by all that is said by St.
John Baptist, or any other before our Saviour's entry
upon his ministry, and public promulgation of the laws
of his kingdom.

He began his preaching with a command to repent,
as St. Matthew tells us, iv. 17. " From that time Jesus
" began to preach, saying, Repent ; for the kingdom
" of heaven is at hand." And Luke v. 32, he tells the
scribes and pharisees," I come not to call the righteous ;"
(those who were truly so, needed no help, they had a
right to the tree of life), " but sinners, to repentance."

In his sermon, as it is called, in the mount, Luke vi.
and Matt. v. &c. he commands they should be exem
plary in good works : " Let your light so shine amongst

as delivered in the Scriptures. 115

" men, that they may see your good works, and glorify
" your Father which is in heaven," Matt. v. 15. And
that they might know what he came for, and what he
expected of them, he tells them, ver. 17 — 20, " Think
" not that I am come to dissolve," or loosen, " the law,
" or the prophets : I am not come to dissolve," or loosen,
" but to make it full," or complete ; by giving it you in
its true and strict sense. Here we see he confirms, and at
once re-in forces all the moral precepts in the Old Testa
ment. " For verily I say to you, Till heaven and earth
" pass, one jot or one tittle, shall in no wise pass from
" the law, till all be done. Whosoever therefore shall
" break one of these least commandments, and shall
" teach men so, he shall be called the least (i, e. as it
" is interpreted, shall not be at all) in the kingdom of
" heaven." Ver. 21, " I say unto you, That except
" your righteousness," i. e. your performance of the
eternal law of right, " shall exceed the righteousness
" of the scribes and pharisees, ye shall in no case enter
" into the kingdom of heaven." And then he goes on
to make good what he said, ver. 17, viz, " That he was
" come to complete the law," viz. by giving its full
and clear sense, free from the corrupt and loosening
glosses of the scribes and pharisees, ver. 22 — 26. He
tells them, That not only murder, but causeless anger,
and so much as words of contempt, were forbidden. He
commands them to be reconciled and kind towards
their adversaries ; and that upon pain of condemnation.
In the following part of his sermon, which is to be read
Luke vi. and more at large, Matt. v. vi. vii. he not
only forbids actual uncleanness, but all irregular desires,
upon pain of hell-fire ; causeless divorces ; swearing in
conversation, as well as forswearing in judgment; re
venge ; retaliation ; ostentation of charity, of devotion, £
and of fasting ; repetitions in prayer, covetousness,
worldly care, censoriousness : and on the other side
commands loving our enemies, doing good to those
that hate us, blessing those that curse us, praying for
those that despitefuliy use us ; patience and meekness
under injuries, forgiveness, liberality, compassion : and
closes all; his particular injunctions, with this general

116 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

golden rule, Matt. vii. 12, " All things whatsoever ye
** would that men should do to you, do you even so to
" them, for this is the law and the prophets." And to
show how much he is in earnest, and expects obedience
to these laws, he tells them, Luke vi. 35, That if they
obey, " great shall be their REWARD ;" they " shall be
" called the sons of the Highest." And to all this, in
the conclusion, he adds the solemn sanction ; " Why
" call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things that
" I say ?" It is in vain for you to take me for the Mes
siah your King, unless you obey me. " Not every one
" who calls me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the king-
" dom of heaven/' or be the Sons of God ; " but he
" that doth the will of my father which is in heaven."
To such disobedient subjects, though they have prophe
sied and done miracles in my name, I shall say at the day
of judgment, " Depart from me, ye workers of iniquity ;
" I know you not."

When, Matt. xii. he was told, that his mother and
brethren sought to speak with him, ver. 49, " Stretch-
" ing out his hands to his disciples, he said, Behold my
" mother and my brethren ; for whosoever shall do the
" will of my Father, who is in heaven, he is my bro-
" ther, and 'sister, and mother." They could not be
children of the adoption, and fellow heirs with him of
eternal life, who did not do the will of his heavenly
Father.

Matt. xv. and Mark vi. the pharisees finding fault,
that his disciples eat with unclean hands, he makes this
declaration to his apostles : " Do not ye perceive, that
" whatsoever from without entereth into a man cannot
" defile him, because it entereth not into his heart, but
" his belly? That which cometh out of the man, that
" defileth the man ; for from within, out of the heart of
" men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications,
" murders, thefts, false witnesses, covetousness, wick-
" edness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy,
" pride, foolishness. All these ill things come from
" within, and defile a man."

He commands self-denial, and the exposing ourselves
to suffering and danger, rather than to deny or disown

as delivered in the Scriptures. 117

him : and this upon pain of losing our souls ; which are
of more worth than all the world. This we may read,
Matt. xvi. 24 — 27, arid the parallel places, Mark viii.
and Luke ix.

The apostles disputing among them, who should be
greatest in the kingdom of the Messiah, Matt, xviii. 1,
he thus determines the controversy, Mark ix. 35, " If
" any one will be first, let him be last of all, and servant
" of all :" and setting a child before them adds, Matt,
xyiii. 3, " Verily I say unto you, Unless ye turn, and
" become as children, ye shall not enter into the king-
" dom of heaven."

Matth. xviii. 15, " If thy brother shall trespass
" against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee
" and him alone : if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained
" thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take
" with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two
" or three witnesses every word may be established.
" And if he shall neglect to Jiear them, tell it to the
" church : but if he neglect to hear the church, let him
" be unto thee, as an heathen and publican." Ver. 21,
" Peter said, Lord, how often shall my brother sin against
" me and I forgive him ? Till seven times ? Jesus said
" unto him, I say not unto thee, till seven times ; but
" until seventy times seven." And then ends the pa-*
rable of the servant, who being himself forgiven, was
rigorous to his fellow-servant, with these words, ver. 34,
" and his Lord was wroth, and delivered him to the
(( tormentors, till he should pay all that was due to him.
" So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you,
'* if you from your hearts forgive not every one his bro-
" ther their trespasses."

Luke x. 25, to the lawyer, asking him, " What shall
" I do to inherit eternal life ? He said, What is written
" in the law? How readest thou?" He answered,
" Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,
" and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and
" with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself."
Jesus said, " This do, and thou shalt live." And when
the lawyer, upon our Saviour's parable of the good Sa
maritan, was forced to confess, that he that showed

118 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

mercy was his neighbour ; Jesus dismissed him with this
charge, ver. 37, " Go, and do thou likewise."

Luke xi. 41, " Give alms, of such things as ye have ;
" behold all things are clean unto you."

Luke xii. 15, " Take heed, and beware of covetous-
" ness." Ver. 22, " Be not solicitous what ye shall
** eat, or what ye shall drink, nor what ye shall put
" on ;" be not fearful, or apprehensive of want ; " for
" it is your Father's pleasure to give you a kingdom.
" Sell that you have, and give alms : and provide your-
'* selves bags that wax not old, a treasure in the heavens,
" that faileth not : for where your treasure is, there will
" your heart be also. Let your loins be girded, and
" your lights burning ; and ye yourselves like unto men
" that wait for the Lord when he will return. Blessed
" are those servants, whom the Lord, when he cometh,
" shall find watching. Blessed is that servant, whom
" the Lord having made ruler of his househould, to give
" them their portion of meat in due season, the Lord,
" when he cometh, shall find so doing. Of a truth I
" say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all
" that he hath. But if that servant say in his heart,
** my Lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to
" beat the men servants, and maidens, and to eat and
" drink, and to be drunken ; the Lord of that servant
" will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and
" at an hour when he is not aware ; and will cut him
" in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with un-
tf believers. And that servant who knew his lord's
" will, and prepared not himself, neither did according
" to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But
" he that knew not and did commit things worthy of
" stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto
" whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be
" required : and to whom men have committed much,
" of him they will ask the more."

Luke xiv. 11, " Whosoever exalteth himself shall be
" abased : and he that humbleth himself shall be ex-
" alted."

Ver. 12, " When thou makest a dinner, or supper, call
" not thy friends, or thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen,

as delivered in the Scriptures. 119

" nor thy neighbours ; lest they also bid thee again, and
" a recompense be made thee. But when thou makest
" a feast, call the poor, and maimed, the lame and the
" blind ; and thou shalt be blessed, for they cannot re-
" compense thee ; for thou shalt be recompensed at the
" resurrection of the just."

Ver. 33, " So likewise, whosoever he be of you, that
" is not ready to forego all that he hath, he cannot be
" my disciple." *vi

Luke xiv. 9, " I say unto you, make to yourselves
" friends of the mammon of unrighteousness : that when
" ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habi-
" tations. If ye have not been faithful in the unrighte-
u ous mammon, who will commit to your trust the
" true riches ? And if ye have not been faithful in that
" which is another man's, who shall give you that
" which is your own ?"

Luke xvii. 3, "If thy brother trespass against thee,
" rebuke him ; and if he repent forgive him. And
" if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and
" seven times in a day turn again unto thee, saying, I
" repent, thou shalt forgive him."

Lukexviii. 1, " He spoke a parable to them to this end,
" that men ought always to pray, and not to faint."

Ver. 18, " One comes to him and asks him, saying,
" Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life ? Jesus
" said unto him, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the
" commandments. He says, Which ? Jesus said, Thou
" knowest the commandments. Thou shalt not kill ;
" thou shalt not commit adultery ; thou shalt not steal ;
" thou shalt not bear false witness ; defraud not ; ho-
" nour thy father and thy mother ; and thou shalt love
" thy neighbour as thyself. He said, all these have I
" observed from my youth. Jesus hearing this, loved
" him, and said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing :
" sell all that thou hast, and give it to the poor, and
" thou shalt have treasure in heaven ; and come, follow
" me." To understand this right, we must take no
tice, that this young man asks our Saviour, what he
must do to be admitted effectually into the kingdom
of the Messiah ? The jews believed, that when the Mes-

120 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

siah came, those of their nation that received him, should
not die ; but that they, with those who, being dead,
should then be raised again by him, should enjoy eter
nal life with him. Our Saviour, in answer to this de
mand, tells the young man, that to obtain the eternal
life of the kingdom of the Messiah, he must keep the
commandments. And then enumerating several of the
precepts of the law, the young man says, he had ob
served these from his childhood. For which the text
tells us, Jesus loved him. But our Saviour, to try whe
ther in earnest he believed him to be the Messiah, and
resolved to take him to be his king, and to obey him as
such, bids him give all that he has to the poor, and
come, and follow him ; and he should have treasure in
heaven. This I look on to be the meaning of the
place; this, of selling all he had, and giving it to the
poor, not being a standing law of his kingdom ; but
a probationary command to this young man ; to try
whether he truly believed him to be the Messiah, and
was ready to obey his commands, and relinquish all to
follow him, when he, his prince, required it.

And therefore we see, Luke xix. 14, where our Sa
viour takes notice of the jews not receiving him as the
Messiah, he expresses it thus : " We will not have this
" man to reign over us." It is not enough to believe
him to be the Messiah, unless we also obey his laws, and
take him to be our king to reign over us.

Matt. xxii. 11 — 13, he that had not on the wedding-
garment, though he accepted of the invitation, and
carne to the wedding, was cast into utter darkness. By
the wedding-garment, it is evident good works are meant
here; that wedding-garment of fine linen, clean, and
white, which we are told, Rev. xix, 8, is the ^XOIW^«T«,
" righteous acts of the saints ;" or, as St. Paul calls it,
Ephes. iv. 1, " The walking worthy of the vocation
" wherewith we are called." This appears from the
parable itself: " The kingdom of heaven," says our
Saviour, ver. 2, " is like unto a king, who made a mar-
" riage for his son." And here he distinguishes those
who were invited, into three sorts : 1. Those who were
invited, and came not ; i. e. those who had the gospel,

as delivered in the Scriptures.

the good news of the kingdom of God proposed to
them, but believed not. 2. Those who came, but had
not on a wedding-garment ; i. e. believed Jesus to be
the Messiah, but were not new clad (as I may so say)
with a true repentance, and amendment of life : nor
adorned with those virtues, which the apostle, Col. iii.
requires to be put on. 3. Those who were invited, did
come, and had on the wedding-garment ; i. e. heard the
gospel, believed Jesus to be the Messiah, and sincerely
obeyed his Jaws. These three sorts are plainly designed
here ; whereof the last only were the blessed, who were
to enjoy the kingdom prepared for them.

Matt, xxiii. " Be not ye called Rabbi ; for one is
" your master, even the Messiah, and ye are all brethren.
" And call no man your father upon the earth : for
" one is your Father which is in heaven. Neither be
" ye called masters : for one is your master, even the
" Messiah. But he that is greatest amongst you, shall
" be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself,
" shall be abased ; and he that shall humble himself,
« shall be exalted."

Luke xxi. 34, " Take heed to yourselves, lest your
" hearts be at any time overcharged with surfeiting and
" drunkenness, and cares of this life."

Luke xxii. 25, " He said unto them, the kings of
" the gentiles exercise lordship over them ; and they
" that exercise authority upon them, are called bene-
" factors. But ye shall not be so. But he that is
" greatest among you, let him be as the younger ; and
" he that is chief, as he that doth serve."

John xiii. 34, " A .new commandment I give unto
" you, That ye love one another : as I have loved you,
'* that ye also love one another. By this shall all men
" know that ye are my disciples, if ye love one an-
" other." This command, of loving one another, is 1
repeated again, chap. xv. 12, and 17.

John xiv. 15, " If ye love me, keep my comrnand-
" ments." Ver. 21, " He that hath my command-
" ments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me :
" and he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father,
" and I will love him, and manifest myself to him."

122 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

Ver. 23, " If a man loveth me he will keep my words/'
Ver. 24, " He that loveth me not, keepeth not my
" sayings."

John xv. 8, " In this is my Father glorified, that ye
" bear much fruit ; so shall ye be my disciples." Ver.
14, " Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I com-
" mand you."

Thus we see our Saviour not only confirmed the
moral law ; and clearing it from the corrupt glosses of
the scribes and pharisees, showed the strictness as well
as obligation of its injunctions ; but moreover, upon
occasion, requires the obedience of his disciples to seve
ral of the commands he afresh lays upon them ; with the
inforcement of unspeakable rewards and punishments in
another world, according to their obedience or disobe
dience. There is not, I think, any of the duties of mo
rality, which he has not, somewhere or other, by him
self and his apostles, inculcated over and over again to
his followers in express terms. And is it for nothing
that he is so instant with them to bring forth fruit ?
Does he, their King, command, and is it an indifferent
thing ? Or will their happiness or misery not at all de
pend upon it, whether they obey or no ? They were re
quired to believe him to be the Messiah ; which faith is
of grace promised to be reckoned to them, for the com
pleting of their righteousness, wherein it was defective :
but righteousness, or obedience to the law of God, was
their great business, which, if they could have attained
by their own performances, there would have been no
need of this gracious allowance, in reward of their
faith : but eternal life, after the resurrection, had been
their due by a former covenant, even that of works ; the
rule whereof was never abolished, though the rigour
was abated. The duties enjoined in it were duties still.
Their obligations had never ceased ; nor a wilful neg
lect of them was ever dispensed with. But their past
transgressions were pardoned, to those who received Je
sus, the promised Messiah, for their king ; and their fu
ture slips covered, if renouncing their former iniquities,
they entered into his kingdom, and continued his sub
jects with a steady resolution and endeavour to obey his

as delivered in the Scriptures* 123

laws. This righteousness therefore, a complete obedi
ence, and freedom from sin, are still sincerely to be
endeavoured after. And it is no-where promised, that
those who persist in a wilful disobedience to his laws,
shall be received into the eternal bliss of his kingdom,
how much soever they believe in him.

A sincere obedience, how can any one doubt to be,
or scruple to call, a condition of the new covenant, as
well as faith ; whoever reads our Saviour's sermon in
the mount, to omit all the rest ? Can any thing be more
express than these words of our Lord ? Matt. vi. 1 4,
" If you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Fa-
" ther will also forgive you : but if you forgive not men
" their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your
" trespasses." And John xiii. 17, " If ye know these
" things, happy are ye if you do them." This is so in-
indispensable a condition of the new covenant, that be
lieving without it, will not do, nor be accepted ; if our
Saviour knew the terms on which he would admit men
into life. " Why call ye me, Lord, Lord," says he,
Luke vi. 46, " and do not the things which I say ?" It
is not enough to believe him to be the Messiah, the Lord,
without obeying him. For that these he speaks to here,
were believers, is evident from the parallel place, Matt,
vii. 21 — 23, where it is thus recorded : " Not every one
" who says, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom
" of heaven ; but he that doth the will of my father,
66 which is in heaven." No rebels, or refractory dis
obedient, shall be admitted there, though they have so
far believed in Jesus, as to be able to do miracles in his
name : as is plain out of the following words : " Many
" will say to me in that day, Have we not prophesied in
" thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, and in
" thy name have done many wonderful works ? And
" then will I profess unto them, I never knew you ; d£-
" part from me, ye workers of iniquity."

This part of the new covenant, the apostles also, in
their preaching the gospel of the Messiah, ordinarily
joined with the doctrine of faith.

St. Peter, in his first sermon, Acts ii. when they were
pricked in heart, and asked, "What shall we do?"

The Reasonableness of Christianity,

says, ver. 38, " Repent, and be baptized, every one of
" you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of
" sins." The same he says to them again in his next
speech, Acts iv. 26, " Unto you first, God having raised
" up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you." How was
this done? " IN TURNING AWAY EVERY ONE FROM

" YOUR INIQUITIES."

The same doctrine they preach to the high priest and
rulers, Acts v. 30, " The God of our fathers raised up
" Jesus, whom ye slew, and hanged on a tree. Him
" hath God exalted with his right hand, to be a Prince
" and a Saviour, for to give REPENTANCE to Israel, and
" forgiveness of sins ; and we are witnesses of these
" things, and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God
" hath given to them that obey him."

Acts xvii. 30, St. Paul tells the Athenians, That now
under the gospel, " God commandeth all men every -
" where to REPENT."

Acts xx. 21, St. Paul, in his last conference with the
elders of Ephesus, professes to have taught them the
whole doctrine necessary to salvation : " I have," says
he, " kept back nothing that was profitable unto you ;
" but have showed you, and have taught you publicly,
" and from house to house ; testifying both to the jews
" and to the Greeks :" and then gives an account what
his preaching had been, viz. " REPENTANCE towards
" God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus the Messiah."
This was the sum and substance of the gospel which St.
Paul preached, and was all that he knew necessary to
salvation ; viz. " Repentance, and believing Jesus to
*' be the Messiah :" and so takes his last farewell of
them, whom he shall never see again, ver. 32, in these
words, " And now, brethren, I commend you to God,
" and to the word of his grace, which is able to build
•" you up, and to give you an inheritance among all
" them that are sanctified." There is an inheritance
conveyed by the word and covenant of grace ; but it is
only to those who are sanctified.

Acts xxiv. 24, " When Felix sent for Paul," that he
and his wife Drusilla might hear him, " concerning the
" faith in Christ ;" Paul reasoned of righteousness, or

as delivered in the Scripures. 125

justice ; and temperance ; the duties we owe to others,
and to ourselves; and of the judgment to come; until
he made Felix to tremble. Whereby it appears, that
" temperance and justice" were fundamental parts of
the religion that Paul professed, and were contained in
the faith which he preached. And if we find the duties
of the moral law not pressed by him every- where, we
must remember, that most of his sermons left upon re
cord, were preached in their synagogues to the jews,
who acknowledged their obedience due to all the pre
cepts of the law ; and would have taken it amiss to have
been suspected not to have been more zealous for the
law than he. And therefore it was with reason that his
discourses were directed chiefly to what they yet wanted,
and were averse to, the knowledge and embracing of
Jesus, their promised Messiah. But what his preaching
generally was, if we will believe him himself, we may
see, Acts xxvi. where giving an account to king Agrip-
pa, of his life and doctrine, he tells him, ver. 20, " I
" showed unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem,
" and throughout all the coasts of Judea, and then to
" the gentiles, that they should repent and turn to
" God, and do works meet for repentance."

Thus we see, by the preaching of our Saviour and his
apostles, that he required of those who believed him to
be the Messiah, and received him for their Lord and
Deliverer, that they should live by his laws : and that
(though in consideration of their becoming his subjects,
by faith in him, whereby they believed and took him to
be the Messiah, their former sins should be forgiven,
. yet) he would own none to be his, nor receive them as
true denizens of the new Jerusalem, into the inheritance
of eternal life ; but leave them to the condemnation of
the unrighteous ; who renounced not their former mis
carriages, and lived in a sincere obedience to his com
mands. What he expects from his followers, he has
sufficiently declared as a legislator : and that they may
not be deceived, by mistaking the doctrine of faith,
grace, free-grace, and the pardon and forgiveness of
sins, and salvation by him, (which was the great end of

126 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

his coming,) he more than once declares to them, for
what omissions and miscarriages he shall judge and con
demn to death, even those who have owned him, and
done miracles in his name : when he comes at last to
render to every one according to what he had DONE in
the flesh, sitting upon his great and glorious tribunal,
at the end of the world.

The first place where we find our Saviour to have
mentioned the day of judgment, is John v. 28, 293 in
these words : " the hour is coming, in which all that
" are in their grave shall hear his [i. e. the Son of
" God's] voice, and shall come forth; they that have
" DONE GOOD, unto the resurrection of life ; and they
" that have DONE EVIL, unto the resurrection of dam-
" nation." That which puts the distinction, if we will
believe our Saviour, is the having done good or evil.
And he gives a reason of the necessity of his judging or
condemning those " who have done evil," in the fol
lowing words, ver. 30, ^l can of myself do nothing.
" As I hear I judge ; and my judgment is just ; be-
" cause I seek not my own will, but the will of my Fa-
" ther who hath sent me." He could not judge of
himself; he had but a delegated power of judging from
the Father, whose will he obeyed in it ; and who was
of purer eyes than to admit any unjust person into the
kingdom of heaven^}

Matt. vii. 22, 23, speaking again of that day, he tells
what his sentence will be, " Depart from me, ye WOIIK-
" ERS of iniquity." Faith in the penitent and sincerely
obedient, supplies the defect of their performances ; and
so by grace they are made just. But we may observe,
none are sentenced or punished for unbelief, but only
for their misdeeds. " They are workers of iniquity"
on whom the sentence is pronounced.

Matt. xiii. 41, " At the end of the world, the Son of
" man shall send forth his angels ; and they shall ga-
" ther out of his kingdom all scandals, and them which
" DO INIQUITY ; and cast them into a furnace of fire ;
" there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." And
again, ver. 49> " The angels shall sever the WICKED

as delivered in the Scriptures. 127

" from among the JUST ; and shall cast them into the
" furnace of fire."

Matt. xvi. 24, " For the Son of man shall come in
" the glory of his Father, with his angels : and then he
" shall reward every man according to his WORKS."

Luke xiii. 26, " Then shall ye begin to say, We have
" eaten and drank in thy presence, and thou hast taught
" in our streets. But he shall say, I tell you, I know
" you not ; depart from me, ye workers of iniquity."

Matt. xxv. 31 — 46, " When the Son of man shall
" come in his glory ; and before him shall be gathered
" all nations ; he shall set the sheep on his right hand,
" and the goats on his left. Then shall the king say
" to them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my! "v
" Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from
" the foundation of the world ; for I was an hungered,
" and ye gave me meat ; I was thirsty, and ye gave me
" drink ; I was a stranger, and ye took me in ; naked,
" and ye clothed me ; I was sick, and ye visited me ; I
" was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the
" righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we
" thee an hungered, and fed thee ? &c. And the King
" shall answer and say unto them, Verily, I say unto
" you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the
" least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
" Then shall he say unto them on the left hand, Depart
" from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for
" the devil and his angels : for I was an hungered, and
" ye gave me no meat ; I was thirsty, and ye gave me
" no drink ; I was a stranger, and ye took me not in ;
" naked, and ye clothed me not ; sick, and in prison,
(f. and ye visited me not. Insomuch that ye did it not
" to one of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall
" go into everlasting punishment; but the righteous
" into life eternal."

These, I think, are all the places where our Saviour
mentions the last judgment, or describes his way of pro
ceeding in that great day ; wherein, as we have ob- — "
served, it is remarkable, that every- where the sentence '-{•
follows doing or not doing, without any mention of be
lieving or not believing. Not that any, to whom the

128 The Reasonableness of Christianity 9

gospel hath been preached, shall he saved, without be
lieving Jesus to be the Messiah : for all being sinners,
and transgressors of the law, and so unjust ; are all liable
to condemnation ; unless they believe, and so through
grace are justified by God, for this faith, which shall be
accounted to them for righteousness. But the rest
wanting this cover, this allowance for their transgres
sions, must answer for all their actions ; and being found
transgressors of the law, shall, by the letter and sanction
of that law, be condemned for not having paid a full
obedience to that law ; and not for want of faith. That
is not the guilt on which the punishment is laid ; though
it be the want of faith, which lays open their guilt un
covered ; and exposes them to the sentence of the law,
against all that are unrighteous.

The common objection here, is, If all sinners shall be
condemned, but such as have a gracious allowance made
them ; and so are justified by God, for believing Jesus
to be the Messiah, and so taking him for their King,
whom they are resolved to obey to the utmost of their
power ; " What shall become of all mankind, who
" lived before our Saviour's time, who never heard of
" his name, and consequently could not believe in
" him ?" To this the answer is so obvious and natural,
that one would wonder how any reasonable man should
think it worth the urging. No-body was, or can be
required to believe, what was never proposed to him to
believe. Before the fulness of time, which God from
the counsel of his own wisdom had appointed to send
his Son in, he had, at several times, and in different
manners, promised to the people of Israel, an extraor
dinary person to come ; who, raised from amongst them
selves, should be their Ruler and Deliverer. The time,
and other circumstances of his birth, life, arid person,
he had in sundry prophecies so particularly described,
and so plainly foretold, that he was well known, and
expected by the jews, under the name of the Messiah,
or Anointed, given him in some of these prophecies.
All then that was required, before his appearing in the
world, was to believe what God had revealed, and to
rely with a full assurance on God, for the performance

fts delivered in the Scriptures.

of his promise ; and to believe, that in due time he
would send them the Messiah, this anointed King, this
promised Saviour and Deliverer, according to his word.
This faith in the promises of God, thi? relying and ac
quiescing in his word and faithfulness, the Almighty
takes well at our hands, as a great mark of homage, paid
by us poor frail creatures, to his goodness and truth, as
well as to his power and wisdom : and accepts it as an
acknowledgment of his peculiar providence, and be- HO
nignity to us. And therefore our Saviour tells us, John
xii. 44, " He that believes on me, believes not on me,
" but on him that sent me." The works of nature show
his wisdom and power ; but it is his peculiar care of
mankind most eminently discovered in his promises to
them, that shows his bounty and goodness ; and conse
quently engages their hearts in love and affection to
him. This oblation of an heart, fixed with dependence
on, and affection to him, is the most acceptable tribute
we can pay him, the foundation of true devotion, and
life of all religion. What a value he puts on this de
pending on his word, and resting satisfied in his pro
mises, we have an example in Abraham ; whose faith
" was counted to him for righteousness," as we have
before remarked out of Rom. iv. And his relying firmly
on the promise of God, without any doubt of its per
formance, gave him the name of the father of the faith
ful ; and gained him so much favour with the Almighty,
that he was called the " friend of God ;" the highest
and most glorious title that can be bestowed on a crea
ture. The thing promised was no more but a son by
his wife Sarah ; and a numerous posterity by him, which
should possess the land of Canaan. These were but
temporal blessings, and (except the birth of a son) very
remote, such as he should never live to see, nor in his
own person have the benefit of. But because he ques
tioned not the performance of it ; but rested fully satis
fied in the goodness, truth, and faithfulness of God,
who had promised, it was counted to him for righte
ousness. Let us see how St. Paul expresses it, Rom. iv.
18 — 22, " Who, against hope, believed in hope, that
6S he might become the father of many nations ; ac-

K

130 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

"cording to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed
" be. And being not weak in faith, he considered not
" his own body now dead, when he was above an hun-
" dred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's
" womb. He staggered not at the promise of God
" through unbelief, but was strong in faith : giving
" glory to God, and being fully persuaded, that what
" he had promised he was able to perform. And
" THEREFORE it was imputed to him for righteousness."
St. Paul having here emphatically described the strength
and firmness of Abraham's faith, informs us, that he
thereby " gave glory to God;" and therefore it was
" accounted to him for righteousness." This is the
way that God deals with poor frail mortals. He is
graciously pleased to take it well of them, and give it
the place of righteousness, and a kind of merit in his
sight ; if they believe his promises, and have a steadfast
relying on his veracity and goodness. St. Paul, Heb.
xi. 6, tells us, " Without faith it is impossible to please
" God : " but at the same time tells us what faith that
is. " For," says he, " he that cometh to God, must
* believe that he is ; and that he is a re warder of them
V that diligently seek him." He must be persuaded of
God's mercy- and goodwill to those who seek to obey
him ; and rest assured of his rewarding those who rely
on him, for whatever, either by the light of nature, or
particular promises, he has revealed to them of his ten
der mercies, and taught them to expect from his bounty.
This description of faith (that we might not mistake
what he means by that faith, without which we cannot
please God, and which recommended the saints of old)
St. Paul places in the middle of the list of those who
were eminent for their faith ; and whom he sets as pat
terns to the converted Hebrews, under persecution, to
encourage them to persist in their confidence of deli
verance by the coming of Jesus Christ, and in their be
lief of the promises they now had under the gospel. By
those examples he exhorts them not to " draw back "
from the hope that was set before them, nor apostatize
from the profession of the Christian religion. This is
plain from ver. 35 — 38, of the precedent chapter:

as delivered in the Scriptures*

" Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath
" great recompence of reward. For ye have great need
" of persisting or perseverance ;" (for so the Greek word
signifies here, which our translation renders " patience."
Vide Luke viii. 15.) " that after ye have done the will of
" God, ye might receive the promise. For yet a little
" while, and he that shall come will come, and will not
" tarry. Now the just shall live by faith. But if any
" man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him."
The examples of faith, which St. Paul enumerates and
proposes in the following words, chap. xi. plainly show,
that the faith whereby those believers of old pleased God,
was nothing but a steadfast reliance on the goodness and
faithfulness of God, for those good things, which either
the light of nature, or particular promises, had given
them grounds to hope for. Of what avail this faith was
with God, we may see, ver. 4, " By faith Abel offered
" unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain ; by
" which he obtained witness that he was righteous."
Ver. 5, " By faith Enoch was translated, that he should
" not see death : for before his translation he had this
" testimony, that he pleased God." Ver. 7, " Noah
" being warned of God of things not seen as yet ;" being
wary, " by faith prepared an ark, to the saving of his
" house; by the which he condemned the world, and
" became heir of the righteousness which is by faith."
And what it was that God so graciously accepted and
rewarded, we are told, ver. 11, " Through faith also
" Sarah herself received strength to conceive seed, and
" was delivered of a child, when she was past age."
How she came to obtain this grace from God, the
apostle tells us, " Because she judged him faithful who
" had promised." Those therefore, who pleased God,
and were accepted by him before the coming of Christ,
did it only by believing the promises, and relying on
the goodness of God, as far as he had revealed it to
them. For the apostle, in the following words, tells us,
ver. 13, " These all died in faith, not having received
" (the accomplishment of) the promises ; but having
" seen them afar off: and were persuaded of them, and
" embraced them." This was all that was required of

K 2

The Reasonableness of Christianity,

them ; to be persuaded of, and embrace the promises
which they had. They could be " persuaded of" no
more than was proposed to them ; " embrace" no more
than was revealed ; according to the promises they had
received, and the dispensations they were under. And
if the faith of things " seen afar off;" if their trusting
in God for the promises he then gave them ; if a belief
of the Messiah to come ; were sufficient to render those
who lived in the ages before Christ acceptable to God,
and righteous before him : I desire those who tell us,
that God will not (nay, some go so far as to say, cannot)
accept any, who do not believe every article of their
particular creeds and systems, to consider, why God,
out of his infinite mercy, cannot as well justify men
now, for believing Jesus of Nazareth to be the promised
Messiah, the King and Deliverer ; as those heretofore,
who believed only that God would, according to his
promise, in due time, send the Messiah, to be a King
and Deliverer.

There is another difficulty often to be met with,
which seems to have something of more weight in it :
and that is, that " though the faith of those before
" Christ (believing that God would send the Messiah,
<( to be a Prince and a Saviour to his people, as he had
" promised), and the faith of those since his time (be-
" lieving Jesus to be that Messiah, promised and sent
" by God), shall be accounted to them for righteous-
" ness ; yet what shall become of all the rest of man-
" kind, who, having never heard of the promise or news
" of a Saviour ; not a word of a Messiah to be sent,
" or that was come ; have had no thought or belief con-
" cerning him?"

To this I answer ; that God will require of every man,
" according to what a man hath, and not according to
" what he hath not." He will not expect the im
provement of ten talents, where he gave but one ; nor
require any one should believe a promise of which he
has never heard. The apostle's reasoning, Rom. x. 14,
is very just : " How shall they believe in him, of whom
" they have not heard?" But though there be many
who being strangers to the commonwealth of Israel,

as delivered in the Scriptures. 133

were also strangers to the oracles of God, committed to
that people ; many, to whom the promise of the Mes
siah never came, and so were never in a capacity to be
lieve or reject that revelation ; yet God had, by the
light of reason, revealed to all mankind, who would
make use of that light, that he was good and merciful.
The same spark of the divine nature and knowledge in
man, which making him a man, showed him the law he
was under, as a man ; showed him also the way of aton
ing the merciful, kind, compassionate Author and Fa
ther of him and his being, when he had transgressed
that law. He that made use of this candle of the Lord,
so far as to find what was his duty, could not miss to
find also the way to reconciliation and foregiveness, when
he had failed of his duty : though, if he used not his
reason this way, if he put out or neglected this light, he
might, perhaps, see neither.

The law is the eternal, immutable standard of right.
And a part of that law is, that a man should forgive,
not only his children, but his enemies, upon their re
pentance, asking pardon, and amendment. And there
fore he could not doubt that the author of this law, and
God of patience and consolation, who is rich in mercy,
would forgive his frail offspring, if they acknowledged
their faults, disapproved the iniquity of their transgres
sions, begged his pardon, and resolved in earnest, for
the future, to conform their actions to this rule, which
they owned to be just and right. This way of reconci
liation, this hope of atonement, the light of nature re
vealed to them : and the revelation of the gospel, having
said nothing to the contrary, leaves them to stand and
fall to their own Father and Master, whose goodness and
mercy is over all his works.

I know some are forward to urge that place of the
Acts, chap. iv. as contrary to this. The words, ver. 10
and 12, stand thus: " Beit known unto you all, and
" to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus
" Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God
" raised from the dead, even by him, doth this man "
[i, e. the lame man restored by Peter] " stand here be-

134 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" fore you whole. This is the stone which is set at
" nought by you builders, which is become the head of
" the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other :
" for there is none other name under heaven given
" among men, in which we must be saved." Which,
in short, is, that Jesus is the only true Messiah, neither
is there any other person, but he, given to be a mediator
between God and man ; in whose name we may ask,
and hope for salvation.

It will here possibly be asked, " Quorsum perditio
" hsec ? " What need was there of a Saviour ? What ad
vantage have we by Jesus Christ ?

It is enough to justify the fitness of any thing to be
done, by resolving it into the " wisdom of God," who
has done it ; though our short views, and narrow un
derstandings, may utterly incapacitate us to see that wis
dom, and to judge rightly of it. We know little of this
visible, and nothing at all of the state of that intellectual
world, wherein are infinite numbers and degrees of spi
rits out of the reach of our ken, or guess ; and therefore
know not what transactions there were between God
and our Saviour, in reference to his kingdom. We know
not what need there was to set up an head and a chieftain,
in opposition to " the prince of this world, the prince
" of the power of the air," &c. whereof there are more
than obscure intimations in scripture. And we shall
take too much upon us, if we shall call God's wisdom or
providence to account, and pertly condemn for needless
all that our weak, and perhaps biassed, understanding
cannot account for.

Though this general answer be reply enough to the
forementioned demand, and such as a rational man, or
fair searcher after truth, will acquiesce in ; yet in this
particular case, the wisdom and goodness of God has
shown itself so visibly to common apprehensions, that it
hath furnished us abundantly wherewithal to satisfy the
curious and inquisitive ; who will not take a blessing,
unless they be instructed what need they had of it, and
why it was bestowed upon them. The great and many
advantages we receive by the coming of Jesus the Mes-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 135

si ah, will show, that it was not without need, that he was
sent into the world.

The evidence of our Saviour's mission from heaven is
so great, in the multitude of miracles he did before all
sorts of people, that what he delivered cannot but be re
ceived as the oracles of God, and unquestionable verity.
For the miracles he did were so ordered by the divine
providence and wisdom, that they never were, nor
could be denied by any of the enemies, or opposers of
Christianity.

Though the works of nature, in every part of them,
sufficiently evidence a deity ; yet the world made so
little use of their reason, that they saw him not, where,
even by the impressions of himself, he was easy to be
found. Sense and lust blinded their minds in some, and
a careless inadvertency in others, and fearful apprehen
sions in most, (who either believed there were, or could
not but suspect there might be, superiour unknown be
ings,) gave them up into the hands of their priests, to
fill their heads with false notions of the Deity, and their
worship with foolish rites, as they pleased : and what
dread or craft once began, devotion soon made sacred,
and religion immutable. In this state of darkness and
ignorance of the true God, vice and superstition held
the world. Nor could any help be had, or hoped for,
from reason ; which could not be heard, and was judged
to have nothing to do in the case ; the priests, every
where, to secure their empire, having excluded reason
from having any thing to do in religion. And in the
crowd of wrong notions, and invented rites, the world had
almost lost the sight of the one only true God. The rational
and thinking part of mankind, it is true, when they
sought after him, they found the one supreme, invisible
God ; but if they acknowledged and worshipped him,
it was only in their own minds. They kept this truth
locked up in their own breasts as a secret, nor ever durst
venture it amongst the people ; much less amongst the
priests, those wary guardians, of their own creeds and
profitable inventions. Hence we see, that reason, speak
ing ever so clearly to the wise and virtuous, had never
authority enough to prevail on the multitude ; and to

136 The Reasonableness of Christianity ,

persuade the societies of men, that there was but one
God, that alone was to be owned and worshipped. The
belief and worship of one God, was the national religion
of the Israelites alone : and if we will consider it, it was
introduced and supported amongst the people by reve
lation. They were in Goshen, and had light, whilst the
rest of the word were in almost Egyptian darkness,
" without God in the world." There was no part of
mankind, who had quicker parts, or improved them
more ; that had a greater light of reason, or followed it
farther in all sorts of speculations, than the Athenians ;
and yet we find but one Socrates amongst them, that
opposed and laughed at their polytheism, and wrong opi
nions of the Deity ; and we see how they rewarded him
for it. Whatsoever Plato, and the soberest of the phi
losophers, thought of the nature and being of the one
God, they were fain, in their outward professions and
worship, to go with the herd, and keep to their religion
established by law : which what it was, and how it had
disposed the minds of these knowing and quick-sighted
Grecians, St. Paul tells -us, Acts xvii. 22—29, " Ye
" men of Athens," says he, " I perceive, that in all
" things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by,
" and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this
" inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom there-
" fore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
" God that made the world, and all things therein, see-
" ing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth
" not in temples made with hands : neither is wor-
" shipped with men's hands, as though he needed any
" thing, seeing that he giveth unto all life, and breath,
'•' and all things ; and hath made of one blood all the
" nations of men, for to dwell on the face of the earth ;
'* and hath determined the times before appointed, and
" the bounds of their habitations ; that they should seek
" the Lord, if haply they might feel him out and find
" him, though he be not far from every one of us."
Here he tells the Athenians, that they, and the rest of
the world (given up to superstition) whatever light there
was in the works of creation and providence, to lead
them to the true God ; vet few of them found him,

as delivered in the Scriptures. 137

He was every- where near them ; yet they were but like
people groping and feeling for something in the dark,
and did not see him with a full and clear day-light ;
" but thought the Godhead like to gold and siver, and
" stone, graven by art and man's device."

In this state of darkness and errour, in reference to the
Ci true God," our Saviour found the world. But the
clear revelation he brought with him, dissipated this
darkness ; made the " one invisible true God " known
to the world : and that with such evidence and energy,
that polytheism and idolatry have no-where been able
to withstand it : but wherever the preaching of the
truth he delivered, and the light of the gospel hath
come, those mists have been dispelled. And, in effect,
we see, that since our Saviour's time, the " belief of one
<( God " has prevailed and spread itself over the face of
the earth. For even to the light that the Messiah
brought into the world with him, we must ascribe the
owning and profession of one God, which the mahometan
religion hath derived and borrowed from it. So that
in this sense it is certainly and manifestly true of our
Saviour, what St. John says of him, 1 John iii. 8, "For
" this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he
" might destroy the works of the devil." This light the
world needed, and this light is received from him : that
there is but " one God," and he " eternal, invisible ; "
not like to any visible objects, nor to be represented by
them.

If it be asked, whether the revelation to the patriarchs
by Moses did not teach this, and why that was not
enough ? The answer is obvious ; that however clearly
the knowledge of one invisible God, maker of heaven
and earth, was revealed to them ; yet that revelation
was shut up in a little corner of the world ; amongst a
people, by that very law, which they received with it,
excluded from a commerce and communication with
the rest of mankind. The gentile world, in our Sa
viour's time, and several ages before, could have no at
testation of the miracles on which the Hebrews built
their faith, but from the jews themselves, a people not
known to the greatest part of mankind; contemned

138 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

and thought vilely of, by those nations that did know
them ; and therefore very unfit and unable to propagate
the doctrine of one God in the world, and diffuse it
through the nations of the earth, by the strength and
force of that ancient revelation, upon which they had
received it. But our Saviour, when he came, threw
down this wall of partition ; and did not confine his
miracles or message to the land of Canaan, or the wor
shippers at Jerusalem. But he himself preached at Sa
maria, and did miracles in the borders of Tyre and
Sidon, and before multitudes of people gathered from
all quarters. And after his resurrection, sent his apo
stles amongst the nations, accompanied with miracles ;
which were done in ail parts so frequently, and before
so many witnesses of all sorts, in broad day-light, that,
as I have before observed, the enemies of Christianity
have never dared to deny them ; no, not Julian himself :
who neither wanted skill nor power to inquire into the
truth : nor would have failed to have proclaimed and
exposed it, if he could have detected any falsehood in
the history of the gospel ; or found the least ground to
question the matter of fact published of Christ and his
apostles. The number and evidence of the miracles
done by our Saviour and his followers, by the power and
force of truth, bore down this mighty and accomplished
emperor, and all his parts, in his own dominions. He
durst not deny so plain a matter of fact, which being
granted, the truth of our Saviour's doctrine and mission
unavoidably follows ; notwithstanding whatsoever artful
suggestions his wit could invent, or malice should offer
to the contrary.

/tNext to the knowledge of one God; maker of all
things ; " a clear knowledge of their duty was wanting
t( to mankind." This part of knowledge, though cul
tivated with some care by some of the heathen philoso
phers, yet got little footing among the people. All
men, indeed, under pain of displeasing the gods, were
to frequent the temples : every one went to their sacri
fices and services : but the priests made it not their
business to teach them virtue. If they were dili
gent in their observations and ceremonies ; punctual

as delivered in the Scriptures. 139

in their feasts and solemnities, and the tricks of religion ;
the holy tribe assured them the gods were pleased, and
they looked no farther. Few went to the schools of the
philosophers to be instructed in their duties, and to
know what was good and evil in their actions. The
priests sold the better pennyworths, and therefore had
all the custom. Lustrations and processions were much
easier than a clean conscience, and a steady course of
virtue ; and an expiatory sacrifice that atoned for the
want of it, was much more convenient than a strict and
holy life. No wonder then, that religion was every
where distinguished from, and preferred to virtue ; and
that it was dangerous heresy and profaneness to think
the contrary. So much virtue as was necessary to hold
societies together, and to contribute to the quiet of
governments, the civil laws of commonwealths taught,
and forced upon men that lived under magistrates.
But these laws being for the most part made by such,
who had no other aims but their own power, reached
no farther than those things that would serve to tie
men together in subjection ; or at most were directly to
conduce to the prosperity and temporal happiness of
any people. But natural religion, in its full extent, was
no-where, that I know, taken care of, by the force of
natural reason. It should seem, by the little that has
hitherto been done in it, that it is too hard a task for
unassisted reason to establish morality in all its parts,
upon its true foundation, with a clear and convincing
light. And it is at least a surer and shorter way, to
the apprehensions of the vulgar, and mass of mankind,
that one manifestly sent from God, and coming with
visible authority from him, should, as a king and law
maker, tell them their duties ; and require their obe
dience ; than leave it to the long and sometimes intri
cate deductions of reason, to be made out to them.
Such trains of reasoning the greatest part of mankind
have neither leisure to weigh ; nor, for want of educa
tion and use, skill to judge of. We see how unsuccessful
in this the attempts of philosophers were before our
Saviour's time. How short their several systems came
of the perfection of a true and complete morality, is

140 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

very visible. And if, since that, the Christian philoso
phers have much out-done them : yet we may observe,
that the first knowledge of the truths they have added,
is owing to revelation : though as soon as they are heard
and considered, they are found to be agreeable to rea
son ; and such as can by no means be contradicted.
Every one may observe a great many truths, which he
receives at first from others, and readily assents to, as
consonant to reason, which he would have found it
hard, and perhaps beyond his strength, to have dis
covered himself. Native and original truth is not so
easily wrought out of the mine, as we, who have it de
livered already dug and fashioned into our hands, are
apt to imagine. And how often at fifty or threescore
years old are thinking men told what they wonder how
they could miss thinking of? Which yet their own
contemplations did not, and possibly never would have
helped them to. Experience shows, that the knowledge
of morality, by mere natural light, (how agreeable so
ever it be to it,) makes but a slow progress, and little
advance in the world. Arid the reason of it is not hard
to be found in men's necessities, passions, vices, and
mistaken interests ; which turn their thoughts another
way : and the designing leaders, as well as following
herd, find it not to their purpose to employ much of
their meditations this way. Or whatever else was the
cause, it is plain, in fact, that human reason unassisted
failed men in its great and proper business of morality.
It never from unquestionable principles, by clear deduc
tions, made out an entire body of the " law of nature."
And he that shall collect all the moral rules of the phi
losophers, and compare them with those contained in
the New Testament, will find them to come short of
the morality delivered by our Saviour, and taught by
his apostles ; a college made up, for the most part, of
ignorant, but inspired fishermen.

Though yet, if any one should think, that out of the
sayings of the wise heathens before our Saviour's time,
there might be a collection made of all those rules of
morality, which are to be found in the Christian reli
gion ; yet this would not at all hinder, but that the

as delivered In the Scriptures. 141

world, nevertheless, stood as much in need of our Sa
viour, and the morality delivered by him. Let it be
granted (though not true) that all the moral precepts
of the gospel were known by somebody or other, amongst
mankind before. But where, or how, or of what use, is
not considered. Suppose they may be picked up here
and there ; some from Solon and Bias in Greece, others
from Tully in Italy : and to complete the work, let
Confucius, as far as China, be consulted ; and Anachar-
sis, the Scythian, contribute his share. What will all
this do, to give the world a complete morality, that may
be to mankind the unquestionable rule of life and man
ners ? I will not here urge the impossibility of collecting
from men, so far distant from one another, in time and
place, and languages. I will suppose there was a Sto-
beus in those times, who had gathered the moral sayings
from all the sages of the world. What would this
amount to, towards being a steady rule ; a certain trans
cript of a law that we are under? Did the saying of
Aristippus, or Confucius, give it an authority ? Was
Zeno a law-giver to mankind ? If not, what he or any
other philosopher delivered, was but a saying of his.
Mankind might hearken to it, or reject it, as they pleas
ed ; or as it suited their interest, passions, principles or
humours. They were under no obligation ; the opinion
of this or that philosopher was of no authority. And
if it were, you must take all he said under the same cha
racter. All his dictates must go for law, certain and
true ; or none of them. And then, if you will take any
of the moral sayings of Epicurus (many whereof Seneca
quotes with esteem and approbation) for precepts of the
law of nature, you must take all the rest of his doctrine
for such too ; or else his authority ceases : and so no
more is to be received from him, or any of the sages of
old, for parts of the law of nature, as carrying with it an
obligation to be obeyed, but what they prove to be so.
But such a body of ethics, proved to be the law of na
ture, from principles of reason, and teaching all the
duties of life ; I think nobody will say the world had
before our Saviour's time. It is not enough, that there
were up and down scattered sayings of wise men, con-

142 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

formable to right reason. The law of nature, is the law
of convenience too : and it is no wonder that those men
of parts, and studious of virtue, (who had occasion to
think on any particular part of it,) should, by meditation,
light on the right even from the observable convenience
and beauty of it ; without making out its obligation
from the true principles of the law of nature, and founda
tions of morality. But these incoherent apophthegms
of philosophers, and wise men, however excellent in
themselves, and well intended by them ; could never
make a morality, whereof the world could be con
vinced ; could never rise to the force of a law, that
mankind could with certainty depend on. Whatsoever
should thus be universally useful, as a standard to which
men should conform their manners, must have its au
thority, either from reason or revelation. It is not every
writer of morality, or compiler of it from others, that
can thereby be erected into a law-giver to mankind;
and a dictator of rules, which are therefore valid, be
cause they are to be found in his books ; under the au
thority of this or that philosopher. He, that any one
will pretend to set up in this kind, and have his rules
pass for authentic directions, must show, that either he
builds his doctrine upon principles of reason, self-evi
dent in themselves ; and that he deduces all the parts
of it from thence, by clear and evident demonstration :
QVj must show his commission from heaven, that he
comes with authority from God, to deliver his will and
commands to the world. In the former way, no-body
that I know, before our Saviour's time, ever did, or
went about to give us a morality. It is true, there is a
law of nature : but who is there that ever did, or under
took to give it us all entire, as a law ; no more, nor no
less, than what was contained in, and had the obligation
of that law ? Who ever made out all the parts of it, put
them together, and showed the world their obligation ?
Where was there any such code, that mankind might
have recourse to, as their unerring rule, before our Sa
viour's time ? If there was not, it is plain there was
need of one to give us such a morality ; such a law,
which might be the sure guide of those who had a desire

as delivered in the Scriptures* 143

to go right ; and, if they had a mind, need not mistake
their duty, but might be certain when they had per
formed, when failed in it. Such a law of morality Jesus
Christ hath given us in the New Testament ; but by the
latter of these ways, by revelation. We have from him
a full and sufficient rule for our direction, and conform
able to that of reason. But the truth and obligation of
its precepts have their force, and are put past doubt
to us, by the evidence of his mission. He was sent by
God : his miracles show it ; and the authority of God
in his precepts cannot be questioned. Here morality
has a sure standard, that revelation vouches, and reason
cannot gainsay, nor question ; but both together witness
to come from God the great law-maker. And such an
one as this, out of the New Testament, I think the world
never had, nor can any one say, is any-where else to be
found. Let me ask any one, who is forward to think
that the doctrine of morality was full and clear in the
world, at our Saviour's birth ; whither would he have
directed Brutus and Cassius, (both men of parts and vir
tue, the one whereof believed, and the other disbelieved
a future being,) to be satisfied in the rules and obliga
tions of all the parts of their duties ; if they should have
asked him, Where they might find the law they were to
live by, and by which they should be charged, or ac
quitted, as guilty, or innocent ? If to the sayings of the
wise, and the declarations of philosophers, he sends them
into a wild wood of uncertainty, to an endless maze,
from which they should never get out : if to the reli
gions of the world, yet worse : and if to their own rea
son, he refers them to that which had some light and
certainty ; but yet had hitherto failed all mankind in a
perfect rule ; and we see, resolved not the doubts that
had arisen amongst the studious and thinking philoso
phers ; nor had yet been able to convince the civilized
parts of the world, that they had not given, nor could,
without a crime, take away the lives of their children,
by exposing them.

If any one shall think to excuse human nature, by
laying blame on men's negligence, that they did not
carry morality to an higher pitch ; and make it out en-

144 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

tire in every part, with that clearness of demonstration
which some think it capable of; he helps not the matter.
Be the cause what it will, our Saviour found mankind
under a corruption of manners and principles, which
ages after ages had prevailed, and must be confessed,
was not in a wray or tendency to be mended. The rules
of morality were in different countries and sects dif
ferent. And natural reason no- where had cured, nor was
like to cure the defects and errours in them. Those just
measures of right and wrong, which necessity had any
where introduced, the civil laws prescribed, or philoso
phy recommended, stood on their true foundations. They
were looked on as bonds of society, and conveniencies
of common life, and laudable practices. But where was
that their oljligation was thoroughly known and al
lowed, and they received as precepts of a law ; of the
highest law, the law of nature ? That could not be,
without a clear knowledge and acknowledgment of
the law-maker, and the great rewards and punishments,
for those that would, or would not obey him. But the
religion of the heathens, as was before observed, little
concerned itself in their morals. The priests, that de
livered the oracles of heaven, and pretended to speak
from the god's, spoke little of virtue and a good life.
And, on the other side, the philosophers, who spoke
from reason, made not much mention of the Deity in
their ethics. They depended on reason and her oracles,
which contain nothing but truth : biit_jet_some parts
of that truth lie too deepjjorour natural powefr easily
to reach, and makeTplam andTvisible to mankind ; with
out some light from above to direct them. When truths
are once known to us, though by tradition, we are apt
to be favourable to our own parts ; and ascribe to our
own understandings the discovery of what, in reality,
we borrowed from others : or, at least, finding we can
prove, what at first we learn from others, we are for
ward to conclude it an obvious truth, which, if we
had sought, we could not have missed. Nothing seems
hard to our understandings that is once known : and
because what we see, we see with our own eyes ; we are
apt to overlook, or forget the help we had from others

as delivered in the Scriptures. 145

who showed it us, and first made us see it ; as if we
were not at all beholden to them, for those truths they
opened the way to, and led us into* For knowledge
being only of truths that are perceived to be so, we are
favourable enough to our own faculties, to conclude,
that they of their own strength would have attained
those discoveries, without any foreign assistance ; and
that we know those truths, by the strength and native
light of our own minds, as they did from whom we re
ceived them by theirs, only they had the luck to be be
fore us. Thus the whole stock of human knowledge is
claimed by every one, as his private possession, as soon
as he (profiting by others discoveries) has got it into
his own mind : and so it is ; but not properly by his
own single industry, nor of his own acquisition. He
studies, it is true, and takes pains to make a progress in
what others have delivered : but their pains were of
another sort, who first brought those truths to light,
which he afterwards derives from them. He that tra
vels the roads now, applauds his own strength and legs
that have carried him so far in such a scantling of time ;
arid ascribes all to his own vigour; little considering
how much he owes to their pains, who cleared the
woods, drained the bogs, built the bridges, and made
the ways passable ; without which he might have toiled
much with little progress. A great many things which
we have been bred up in the belief of, from our cradles,
(and are notions grown familiar, and, as it were, natural
to us, under the gospel,) we take for unquestionable ob
vious truths, and easily demonstrable; without consi
dering how long we might have been in doubt or igno
rance of them, had revelation been silent. And many
are beholden to revelation, who do not acknowledge
It is no diminishing to revelation, that reason gives its
suffrage too, to the truths revelation has discovered. ,
Ijut it io our mistake to think, that because reason con-/*
firms thern to us, we had the first certain knowledge of
them from thence; and in that clear evidence we now
possess them.. The contrary is manifest, in the defec
tive morality of the gentiles, before our Saviour's time ;
and the want of reformation in the principles and mea
sures of it, as well as practice. Philosophy seemed tq

L

146 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

t£& have spent its strength, and done its utmost : or if it
A »should have gone farther, as we see it did not, and
from undeniable principles given us ethics in a science
like mathematics, in every part demonstrable; this
yet would not have been so effectual to man in this
imperfect state, nor proper for the cure. The greatest
part of mankind want leisure or capacity for demonstra
tion ; nor can carry a train of proofs, which in that way
they must always depend upon for conviction, and can
not be required to assent to, until they see the demon
stration. Wherever they stick, the teachers are always
put upon proof, and must clear the doubt by a thread
of coherent deductions from the first principle, how
long, or how intricate soever they be. And you may as
soon hope to have all the day-labourers and tradesmen,
the spinsters and dairy-maids, perfect mathematicians,
as to have them perfect in ethics this way. Hearing
plain commands, is the sure and only course to bring
them to obedience and practice. The greatest part can
not know, and therefore they must believe. And I ask,
whether one coming from heaven in the power of God,
in full and clear evidence and demonstration of mira
cles, giving plain and direct rules of morality and obe
dience ; be riot likelier to enlighten the bulk of mankind,
and set them right in their duties, and bring them
to do them, than by reasoning with them from general
notions and principles of human reason ? And were all
the duties of human life clearly demonstrated, yet I
conclude, when well considered, that method of teach
ing men their duties would be thought proper only for
a few, who had much leisure, improved understandings,
and were used to abstract reasonings. But the instruc
tion of the people were best still to be left to the pre
cepts and principles of the gospel. The healing of the
sick, the restoring sight to the blind by a word, the rais
ing and being raised from the dead, are matters of fact,
which they can without difficulty conceive, and that he
who does such things, must do them by the assistance of
a divine power. These things lie level to the ordinariest
apprehension : he that can distinguish between sick
and well, lame and sound, dead and alive, is capable of
this doctrine. To one who is once persuaded that Jesus

as delivered in the Scriptures. 147

Christ was sent by God to be a King-, and a Saviour of
those who do believe in him ; all his commands become
principles ; there needs no other proof for the truth of
what he says, but that he said it. And then there needs
no more, but to read the inspired books, to be instruct
ed : all the duties of morality lie there clear, and plain,
and easy to be understood. And here I appeal, whether
this be not the surest, the safest, and most effectual way
of teaching : especially if we add this farther considera
tion, that as it suits the lowest capacities of reasonable
creatures, so it reaches and satisfies, nay, enlightens the
highest. The most elevated understandings cannot but^
submit to the authority of this doctrine as divine; which *
coming from the mouths of a company of illiterate men,
hath not only the attestation of miracles, but reason to
confirm it : since they delivered no precepts but such,
as though reason of itself had not clearly made out, yet
it could not but assent to, when thus discovered, and
think itself indebted for the discovery. The credit and
authority our Saviour and his apostles had over the minds
of men, by the miracles they did, tempted them not to
mix (as we find in that of all the sects and philosophers,
and other religions) any conceits, any wrong rules, any
thing tending to their own by-interest, or that of a party,
in their morality. No tang of prepossession, or fancy ;
no footsteps of pride, or vanity ; no touch of ostentation,
or ambition : appears to have a hand in it. It is all
pure, all sincere ; nothing too much, nothing wanting ;
but such a complete rule of life, as the wisest men
must acknowledge, tends entirely to the good of man-
kind, and that all would be happy, if all would prac
tise it.

3. The outward forms of worshipping the Deity,
wanted a reformation. Stately buildings, costly orna
ments, peculiar and uncouth habits, and a numerous
huddle of pompous, fantastical, cumbersome ceremonies,
every-where attended divine worship. This, as it had
the peculiar name, so it was thought the principal
part, if not the whole of religion. Nor could this, pos
sibly, be amended, whilst the Jewish ritual stood ; and
there was so much of it mixed with the worship of the
true God. To this also our Saviour, with the know*

148 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

ledge of the infinite, invisible, supreme Spirit, brought
a remedy, in a plain, spiritual, and suitable worship.
Jesus says to the woman of Samaria, " The hour Cometh,
" when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at
" Jerusalem, worship the Father. But the true wor-
'« shippers shall worship the Father, both in Spirit and
" in truth ; for the Father seeketh such to worship him."
To be worshipped in spirit and truth, with application
of mind, and sincerity of heart, was what God hence
forth only required. Magnificent temples, and confine
ment to certain places, were now no longer necessary
for his worship, which by a pure heart might be per
formed any-where. The splendour and distinction of
habits, and pomp of ceremonies, and all outside perform
ances, might now be spared. God, who was a spirit,
and made known to be so, required none of those, but
the spirit only ; and that in public assemblies, (where
some actions must lie open to the view of the world), all
that could appear and be seen, should be done decently,
and in order > and to edification. Decency, order and
edification, were to regulate all their public acts of wor
ship, and beyond what these required, the outward ap
pearance (which was of little value in the eyes of God)
was not to go. Having shut indecency and confusion
out of their assemblies, they need not be solicitous about
useless ceremonies. Praises and prayer* humbly offered
up to the Deity, were the worship he now demanded ;
and in these every one was to look after his own heart,
and to know that it was that alone which God had re
gard to, and accepted.

4. Another great advantage received by our Saviour,
is the great encouragement he brought to a virtuous
and pious life ; great enough to surmount the difficul
ties and obstacles that lie in the way to it, and reward
the pains and hardships of those who stuck firm to their
duties, and suffered for the testimony of a good con
science. The portion of the righteous has been in all
ages taken notice of, to be pretty scanty in this world.
Virtue and prosperity do not often accompany one an
other ; and therefore virtue seldom had many followers.
And it is no wonder she prevailed not much in a state,
where the inconveniencies that attended her were visi*

as delivered in the Scriptures. 149

ble, and at hand ; and the rewards doubtful, and at a
distance. Mankind, who are and must be allowed to
pursue their happiness, nay, cannot be hindered ; could
not but think themselves excused from a strict observa
tion of rules, which appeared so little to consist of their
chief end, happiness ; whilst they kept them from the en
joyments of this life ; and they had little evidence and
security of another. It is true they might have argued
the other way, and concluded. That because the good
were most of them ill-treated here, there was another
place where they should meet with better usage ; but
it is plain they did not : their thoughts of another life
were at best obscure, and their expectations uncertain.
Of manes, and ghosts, and the shades of departed men,
there was some talk ; but little certain, and less minded.
They had the names of Styx and Acheron, of Elysian
fields and seats of the blessed : but they had them gene
rally from their poets, mixed with their fables. And
so they looked more like the inventions of wit, and or
naments of poetry, than the serious persuasions of the
grave and the sober. They came to them bundled up
among their tales, and for tales they took them. And
that which rendered them more suspected, and less use
ful to virtue, was, that the philosophers seldom set their
rules on men's minds and practices, by consideration of
another life. The chief of their arguments were from
the excellency of virtue ; and the highest they generally
went, was the exalting of human nature, whose perfec
tion lay in virtue. And if the priest at any time
talked of the ghosts below, and a life after this ; it was
only to keep men to their superstitious and idolatrous
rites ; whereby the use of this doctrine was lost to the
credulous multitude, and its belief to the quicker-
sighted ; who suspected it presently of priestcraft. Be
fore our Saviour's time the doctrine of a future state,
though it were not wholly hid, yet it was not clearly
known in the world. It was an imperfect view of rea
son, or, perhaps, the decayed remains of an ancient
tradition, which seemed rather to float on men's fan
cies, than sink deep into their hearts. It was some
thing they knew not what, between being and not be-

150 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

ing. Something in man they imagined might escape
the grave; but a perfect complete life, of an eternal
duration, after this, was what entered little into their
thoughts and less into their persuasions. And they
were so far from being clear herein, that we see no na
tion of the world publicly professed it, and built upon it :
no religion taught it ; and it was no-where made an
article of faith, and principle of religion, until Jesus
Christ came ; of whom it is truly said, that he, at his
appearing, " brought life and immortality to light.'*
And that not only in the clear revelation of it, and in
instances shown of men raised from the dead ; but
he has given us an unquestionable assurance and pledge
of it in his own resurrection and ascension into heaven.
How has this one truth changed the nature of things in
the world, and given the advantage to piety over all
that could tempt or deter men from it ! The philoso
phers, indeed, showed the beauty of virtue ; they set
her off so, as drew men's eyes and approbation to her ;
but leaving her unendowed, very few were willing to
espouse her. The generality could not refuse her their
esteem and commendation ; but still turned their backs
on her, and forsook her, as a match not for their turn.
But now there being put into the scales on her side,
" an exceeding and immortal weight of glory ;" interest
is come about to her, and virtue now is visibly the most
enriching purchase, and by much the best bargain.
That she is the perfection and excellency of our nature;
that she is herself a reward, and will recommend our
names to future ages, is not all that can now be said of
her. It is not strange that the learned heathens satisfied
not many with such airy commendations. It has an
other relish and efficacy to persuade men, that if they
live well here, they shall be happy hereafter. Open their
eyes upon the endless, unspeakable joys of another life,
and their hearts will find something solid and powerful
to move them. The view of heaven and hell will cast
a slight upon the short pleasures and pains of this pre
sent state, and give attractions and encouragements to
virtue which reason and interest, and the care of our
selves, cannot but allow arid prefer. Upon this founda-

as delivered in the Scriptures. 151

tion, and upon this only, morality stands firm, and
may defy all competition. This makes it more than a
name ; a substantial good, worth all our aims and en
deavours ; and thus the gospel of Jesus Christ has deli
vered it to us.

5. To these I must add one advantage more by Jesus
Christ, and that is the promise of assistance. If we do
what we can, he will give us his Spirit to help us to do
what, and how we should. It will be idle for us, who
know not how our own spirits move and act us, to ask
in what manner the Spirit of God shall work upon us.
The wisdom that accompanies that Spirit knows better
than we, how we are made, and how to work upon us.
If a wise man knows how to prevail on his child, to
bring him to what he desires ; can we suspect that the
spirit and wisdom of God should fail in it ; though we
perceive or comprehend not the ways of his operation ?
Christ has promised it, who is faithful and just ; and
we cannot doubt of the performance. It is not requisite
on this occasion, for the enhancing of this benefit, to
enlarge on the frailty of our minds, and weakness of our
constitutions ; how liable to mistakes, how apt to go
astray, and how easily to be turned out of the paths of
virtue. If any one needs go beyond himself, and the
testimony of his own conscience in this point ; if he
feels not his own errours and passions always tempting,
and often prevailing, against the strict rules of his duty;
he need but look abroad into any stage of the world, to
be convinced. To a man under the difficulties of his
nature, beset with temptations, and hedged in with
prevailing custom ; it is no small encouragement to set
himself seriously on the courses of virtue, and practice
of true religion ; that he is from a sure hand, and an
Almighty arm, promised assistance to support and carry
him through.

There remains yet something to be said to those, wh#
will be ready to object, " If the belief of Jesus of Na-
" zareth to be the Messiah, together with those con-
" comitant articles of his resurrection, rule, and com-
" ing again to judge the world, be all the faith required,
" as necessary to justification, to what purpose were
" the epistles written ; I say, if the belief of those many

152 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

" doctrines contained in them be not also necessary to
" salvation ; and what is there delivered a Christian
" may believe or disbelieve, and yet, nevertheless, be a
* member of Christ's church, and one of the faithful ?"
To this I answer, that the epistles are written upon
several occasions : and he that will read them as he
ought, must observe what it is in them, which is princi
pally aimed at ; find what is the argument in hand, and
how managed ; if he will understand them right, and
profit by them. The observing of this will best help us
to the true meaning and mind of the writer ; for that is
the truth which is to be received and believed ; and
not scattered sentences in scripture-language, accom
modated to our notions and prejudices. We must
look into the drift of the discourse, observe the cohe
rence and connexion of the parts, and see how it is
consistent with itself and other parts of scripture; if
we will conceive it right. We must not cull out, as
best suits our system, here and there a period or verse ;
as if they were all distinct and independent aphorisms ;
and make these the fundamental articles of the Christian
faith, and necessary to salvation ; unless God has made
them so. There be many truths in the bible, which a
good Christian, may be wholly ignorant of, and so not
believe : which, perhaps, some lay great stress on, and
call fundamental articles, because they are the distin
guishing points of their communion. The epistles,
most of them, carry on a thread of argument, which, in
the style they are writ, cannot every- where be observed
without great attention, and to consider the texts as
they stand, and bear a part in that, is to view them in
their due light, and the way to get the true sense of
them. JThey were writ to those who were in the faith,
and true Christians already : and so could not be de
signed to teach them the fundamental articles and points
necessary to salvation. The epistle to the Romans was
writ to all " that were at Rome, beloved of God, called
" to be saints, whose faith was spoken of through the
" world," chap. i. 7, 8. To whom St. Paul's first
epistle to the Corinthians was, he shows, chap. i. 2, 4,
&c. " Unto the church of God which is at Corinth,
*c to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to

at delivered in the Scriptures. 153

'< be saints ; with all them that in every place call upon
" the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and
a ours. I thank my God always on your behalf, for the
" grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ ; that
" in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance,
" and in all knowledge : even as the testimony of Christ
" was confirmed in you. So that ye come behind in
" no gift ; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus
" Christ." And so likewise the second was, %c To the
tf church of God at Corinth, with all the saints in
" Achaia," chap. i. 1. His next is to the churches of
Galatia. That to the Ephesians was, " To the saints
" that were at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ
" Jesus." So likewise,, " To the saints and faithful
" brethren in Christ at Colosse, who had faith in Christ
" Jesus, and love to the saints. To the church of the
*' Thessalonians. To Timothy his son in the faith.
" To Titus his own son after the common faith. To
" Philemon his dearly beloved, and fellow-labourer."
And the author to the Hebrews calls those he writes to
" Holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling,"
chap. iii. 1. From whence it is evident, that all those
whom St. Paul writ to, were brethren, saints, faithful
in the church, and so Christians already ; arid therefore,
wanted not the fundamental articles of the Christian re
ligion ; without a belief of which they could not be
saved ; nor can it be supposed, that the sending of such
fundamentals was the reason of the apostle's writing to
any of them. To such also St. Peter writes, as is plain
from the first chapter of each of his epistles. Nor is it
hard to observe the like in St. James's and St. John's
epistles. And St. Jude directs his thus : *' To them
" that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved
" in Jesus Christ, and called/1 The epistles, there^
fore, being all written to those who were already be-v
lievers and Christians, the occasion and end of writing
them could not be to instruct them in that which was
necessary to make them Christians. This, it is plain,
they knew and believed already ; or else they could not
have been Christians and believers. And they were writ
upon particular occasions ; and without those occasions,

154 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

had not been writ ; and so cannot be thought necessary
to salvation : though they resolving doubts, and re
forming mistakes, are of great advantage to our know
ledge and practice. I do not deny, but the great doc
trines of the Christian faith are dropt here and there,
and scattered up and down in most of them. But it is
not in the epistles we are to learn what are the funda
mental articles of faith, where they are promiscu
ously and without distinction mixed with other truths,
in discourses that were (though for edification, indeed,
yet) only occasional. We shall find and discern those
great and necessary points best, in the preaching of our
Saviour and the apostles, to those who were yet strangers,
and ignorant of the faith ; to bring them in, and
convert them to it. And what that was, we have seen
already, out of the history of the evangelists, and the
acts ; where they are plainly laid down, so that nobody
can mistake them. The epistles to particular churches,
besides the main argument of each of them, (which was
some present concernment of that particular church, to
which they severally were addressed,) do in many places
explain the fundamentals of the Christian religion, and
that wisely ; by proper accommodations to the appre
hensions of those they were writ to ; the better to make
them imbibe the Christian doctrine, and the more easily
to comprehend the method, reasons, and grounds of the
great work of salvation. Thus we see, in the epistle to
the Romans, adoption (a custom well known amongst
those of Rome) is much made use of, to explain to them
the grace and favour of God, in giving them eternal
life ; to help them to conceive how they became the
children of God, and to assure them of a share in the
kingdom of heaven, as heirs to an inheritance. Whereas
the setting out, and confirming the Christian faith to
the Hebrews, in the epistle to them, is by illusions and
arguments, from the ceremonies, sacrifices, and oeco-
nomy of the jews, and references to the records of the
Old Testament. And as for the general epistles, they,
we may see, regard the state and exigencies, and some
peculiarities of those times. These holy writers, in
spired from above, writ nothing but truth ; and in most

as delivered in the Scriptures

places, very weighty truths to us now; for the ex
pounding, clearing, and confirming of the Christian doc
trine, and establishing those in it who had embraced it.
But yet every sentence of theirs must not be taken up,
and looked on as a fundamental article, necessary to
salvation ; without an explicit belief whereof, no-body
could be a member of Christ's church here, nor be ad
mitted into his eternal kingdom hereafter. If all, or
most of the truths declared in the epistles, were to be
received and believed as fundamental articles, what then
became of those Christians who were fallen asleep (as
St. Paul witnesses in his first to the Corinthians, many
were) before these things in the epistles were revealed
to them ? Most of the epistles not being written till
above twenty years after our Saviour's ascension, and
some after thirty.

But farther, therefore, to those who will be ready to
say, " May those truths delivered in the epistles, which
" are not contained in the preaching of our Saviour
" and his apostles, and are therefore, by this account,
" not necessary to salvation ; be believed or disbelieved,
" without any danger ? May a Christian safely question
« or doubt of them ? "

To this I answer, That the law of faith, being a co
venant of free grace, God alone can appoint what shall
be necessarily believed by every one whom he will
justify. What is the faith which he will accept and ac
count for righteousness, depends wholly on his good
pleasure. For it is of grace, and not of right, that this
faith is accepted. And therefore he alone can set the
measures of it : and what he has so appointed and de
clared is alone necessary. No-body can add to these
fundamental articles of faith ; nor make any other ne
cessary, but what God himself hath made, and declared
to be so. And what these are which God requires of
those who will enter into, and receive the benefits of
the new covenant, has already been shown. An explicit
belief of these is absolutely required of all those to
whom the gospel of Jesus Christ is preached, and salva
tion through his name proposed.

156 The Reasonableness of Christianity,

. The other parts of divine revelation are objects of
faith, and are so to be received. They are truths,
whereof no one can be rejected ; none that is once
known to be such, may, or ought to be disbelieved.
For to acknowledge any proposition to be of divine re
velation and authority ; and yet to deny, or disbelieve it ;
is to offend against this fundamental article and ground
of faith, that God is true. But yet a great many of the
truths revealed in the gospel, every one does, and must
confess, a man may be ignorant of; nay, disbelieve,
without danger to his salvation : as is evident in those,
who, allowing the authority, differ in the interpretation
and meaning of several texts of scripture, not thought
fundamental : in all which, it is plain, the contending
parties on one side or the other, are ignorant of, nay,
disbelieve the truths delivered in holy writ ; unless
contrarieties and contradictions can be contained in the
same words ; and divine revelation can mean contrary
to itself.

Though all divine revelation requires the obedience
of faith, yet every truth of inspired scriptures is not one
of those, that by the law of faith is required to be ex
plicitly believed to justification. What those are, we
have seen by what our Saviour and his apostles proposed
to, and required in those whom they converted tothefaith.
Those are fundamentals, which it is not enough not to
disbelieve : every one is required actually to assent to
them. But any other proposition contained in the scrip
ture, which God has not thus made a necessary part of
the law of faith, (without an actual assent to which, he
will not allow any one to be a believer,) a man may be
ignorant of, without hazarding his salvation by a defect
in his faith. He believes all that God has made neces
sary for him to believe, and assent to ; and as for the rest
of divine truths, there is nothing more required of him,
but that he receive all the parts of divine revelation,
with a docility and disposition prepared to embrace and
assent to all truths coming from God ; and submit his
mind to whatsoever shall appear to him to bear that cha
racter. Where he, upon fair endeavours, understands

as delivered in the Scriptures* 157

it not, how can he avoid being ignorant ? And where
he cannot put several texts, and make them consist to
gether, what remedy ? He must either interpret one by
the other, or suspend his opinion. He that thinks that
more is, or can be required of poor frail man in matters
of faith, will do well to consider what absurdities he will
run into. God, out of the infiniteness of his mercy,
has dealt "with man, as a compassionate and tender
Father. He gave him reason, and with it a law : that
could not be otherwise than what reason should dictate!
unless we should think, that a reasonable creature should
have an unreasonable law. But, considering the frailty
of man, apt to run into corruption and misery, he pro
mised a Deliverer, whom in his good time he sent ; and
then declared to all mankind, that whoever would be
lieve him to be the Saviour promised, and take him
now raised from the dead^ and constituted the Lord and
Judge of all men, to be their King and Ruler, should
be saved. This is a plain intelligible proposition : and
the all-merciful God seems herein to have consulted the
poor of this world, and the bulk of mankind. These
are articles that the labouring and illiterate man may \ H;
comprehend. This is a religion suited to vulgar capa
cities ; and the state of mankind in this world, destined
to labour and travel. The writers and wranglers in re
ligion fill it with niceties, and dress it up with notions*
which they make necessary and fundamental parts of it ;
as if there were no way into the church, but through the
academy or lyceum. The greatest part of mankind
have not leisure for learning and logic, and superfine
distinctions of the schools. Where the hand is used to
the plough and the spade, the head is seldom elevated
to sublime notions, or exercised in mysterious reason
ing. It is well if men of that rank (to say nothing of
the other sex) can comprehend plain propositions, and
a short reasoning about things familiar to their minds* \
and nearly allied to their daily experience. Go beyond
this, and you amaze the greatest part of mankind ; and
may as well talk Arabic to a poor day-labourer, as the
notions and language that the books and disputes of re
ligion are filled with ; and as soon you will be under-

158 The Reasonableness of Christianity.

stood. The dissenting congregation are supposed by
their teachers to be more accurately instructed in mat
ters of faith, and better to understand the Christian re
ligion, than the vulgar conformists, who are charged
with great ignorance ; how truly, I will not here deter
mine. But I ask them to tell me seriously, " Whether
" half their people have leisure to study ? Nay, Whe-
" ther one in ten, of those who come to their meetings
" in the country, if they had time to study them, do
" or can understand the controversies at this time so
" warmly managed amongst them, about ( justifica-
" tion,' the subject of this present treatise ? " I have
talked with some of their teachers, who confess them
selves not to understand the difference in debate between
them. And yet the points they stand on, are reckoned
of so great weight, so material, so fundamental in reli
gion, that they divide communion, and separate upon
them. Had God intended that none but the learned
scribe, the disputer, or wise of this world, should be
Christians, or be saved, thus religion should have been
prepared for them, filled with speculations and niceties,
obscure terms, and abstract notions. But men of that
expectation, men furnished with such acquisitions, the
apostle tells us, 1 Cor. i. are rather shut out from the
simplicity of the gospel ; to make way for those poor,
ignorant, illiterate, who heard and believed promises of
a Deliverer, and believed Jesus to be him ; who could
conceive a man dead and made alive again ; and believe
that he should, at the end of the world, come again and
pass sentence on all men, according to their deeds.
That the poor had the gospel preached to them ; Christ
makes a mark, as well as business of his mission, Matt,
xi. 5. And if the poor had the gospel preached to
them, it was, without doubt, such a gospel as the poor
could understand ; plain and intelligible ; and so it was,
as we have seen, in the preachings of Christ and his
apostles.

VINDICATION

OF THE

REASONABLENESS

OF

CHRISTIANITY, &c

FROM MR. EDWARDS'S

REFLECTIONS.

( 161 )

VINDICATION

OF THE

REASONABLENESS

OF

C II R I S T I A N I T Y, &c,

MY Book had not been long out, before it fell under
the correction of the author of a Treatise, entitled,
" Some Thoughts concerning the several Causes arid
" Occasions of Atheism, especially in the present
" Age." No contemptible adversary, I'll assure you ;
since, as it seems, he has got the faculty to heighten
every thing that displeases him, into the capital crime
of atheism; and breathes against those, who come in
his way, a pestilential air, whereby every the least dis
temper is turned into the plague, and becomes mortal.
For whoever does not just say after Mr. Edwards, can
not, it is evident, escape being an atheist, or a promoter
of atheism. I cannot but approve of any one's zeal, to
guard and secure that great and fundamental article of
all religion and morality, " That there is a God :" but

162 A Vindication of the

atheism being a crime, which, for its madness as well as
guilt, ought to shut a man out of all sober and civil
society, should be very warily charged on any one, by
deductions and consequences, which he himself does not
own, or, at least, do not manifestly and unavoidably flow
from what he asserts. This caution, charity, I think,
obliges us to : and our author would possibly think him
self hardly dealt with, if, for neglecting some of those
rules he himself gives, p. 31 and 34, against atheism,
he should be pronounced a promoter of it : as rational
a charge, I imagine, as some of those he makes ; and as
fitly put together, as " the Treatise of the Reasonableness
" of Christianity, &c." brought in among the causes
of atheism. However I shall not much complain of
him, since he joins me, p. 104, with no worse com
pany, than two eminently pious and learned * prelates
of our church, whom he makes favourers of the same
conceit, as he calls it. But what has that conceit to do
with atheism ? Very much. That conceit is of kin to
socinianism, and socinianism to atheism. Let us hear
Mr. Edwards himself. He says, p. 113, I am " all over
" socinianized :" and therefore, my book fit to be
placed among the causes of atheism. For in the 64th,
and following -pages, he endeavours to show, That " a
" socinian is an atheist ;" or, lest that should seem harsh,
" one that favours the cause of atheism," p. 75. For
so he has been pleased to mollify, now it is published as
a treatise, what was much more harsh, and much more
confident in it, when it was preached as a sermon. In
this abatement, he seems a little to comply with his own
advice, against his fourth cause of atheism ; which we
have in these words, p. 34, u Wherefore, that we may
" effectually prevent this folly in ourselves, let us banish
" presumption, confidence, and self-conceit ; let us ex-
"' tirpate all pride and arrogance ; let us not list ourselves
44 in the number of capricious opinionators."

I shall leave the socinians themselves to answer his
charge against them, and shall examine his proof of my
being a socinian. It stands thus, p. 112, " When he"

* Bp. Taylor, and the Author of <f The Naked Truth/'

Reasonableness of Christianity, $$c. 163

(the author of the Reasonableness of Christianity, &£.)
" proceeds to mention the advantages and benefits of
" Christ's coming into the world, and appearing in the
" flesh, he hath not one syllable of his satisfying for us ;
" or, by his death, purchasing life or salvation, or any
" thing that sounds like it. This, and several other
" things, show, that he is all over socinianized." Which
in effect is, that because I have not set down all that
this author perhaps would have done, therefore I am a
socinian. But what if I should say, I set down as much
as my argument required, and yet am no socinian ?
Would he, from my silence and omission, give me the
lie, and say 1 am one ? Surmises that may be overturned
by a single denial, are poor arguments, and such as some
men would be ashamed of: at least, if they are to be
permitted to men of this gentleman's skill and zeal,
who knows how to make a good use of conjectures,
suspicions, and uncharitable censures in the cause of
God ; yet even there too (if the cause of God can need
such arts) they require a good memory to keep them
from recoiling upon the author. He might have taken
notice of these words in my book, (page 9 of this vol.)
" From this estate of death, JESUS CHRIST RESTORES
" all mankind to life." And a little lower, " The life
" which Jesus Christ restores to all men/' And p. 109,
" He that hath incurred death for his own transgression,
66 cannot LAY DOWN HIS LIFE FOR ANOTHER, as our
" Saviour professes he did." This, methinks, SOUNDS
SOMETHING LIKE " Christ's purchasing life for us by his
" death." But this reverend gentleman has an answer
ready ; it was not in the place he would have had it in,
it was not where I mention the advantages and benefits
of Christ's coming. And therefore, I not having there
one syllable of Christ's purchasing life and salvation for
us by his death, or any thing that sounds like it : this
and several other things that might be offered, show that
I am " all over socinianized." A very clear and inge
nuous proof, and let him enjoy it.

But what will become of me, that I have not men
tioned satisfaction !

Possibly, this reverend gentleman would have had

M 2

164 A Vindication of the

charity enough for a known writer of the brotherhood,
to have found it by an " inuendo," in those words
above quoted, of laying down his life for another. But
every thing is to be strained here the other way. For
the author of " the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c.M
is of necessity to be represented as a socinian ; or else his
book may be read, and the truths in it, which Mr. Ed
wards likes not, be received, and people put upon ex
amining. Thus one, as full of happy conjectures and
suspicions as this gentleman, might be apt to argue.
But what if the author designed his treatise, as the title
shows, chiefly for those who were not yet thoroughly,
or firmly, Christians, proposing to work on those, who
either wholly disbelieved, or doubted of the truth of the
Christian religion ? Would any one blame his prudence,
if he mentioned only those advantages, which all chris-
tians are agreed in ? Might he not remember and ob
serve that command of the apostle, Rom. xiv. 1, " Him
" that is weak in the faith, receive ye, but not to doubt-
" ful disputations ;" without being a socinian ? Did he
amiss, that he offered to the belief of those who stood
off, that, and only that, which our Saviour and his apo
stles preached, for the reducing the unconverted world :
and would any one think he in earnest went about to
persuade men to be Christians, who should use that as an
argument to recommend the gospel, which he has ob
served men to lay hold on, as an objection against it ?
To urge such points of controversy, as necessary articles
of faith, when we see our Saviour and the apostles, in
their preaching, urged them not as necessary to be be
lieved to make men Christians, is (by our own autho
rity) to add prejudices to prejudices, and to block up
our own way to those men, whom we would have access
to, and prevail upon. But some men had rather you
should write booty, and cross your own design of re
moving men's prejudices to Christianity, than leave out
one tittle of what they put into their systems. To such,
I say, convince but men of the mission of Jesus Christ,
make them but see the truth, simplicity, and reasonable
ness, of what he himself taught, and required to be be
lieved by his followers ; and you need not doubt, but

Reasonableness of Christianity ', 8$c. 165

being once fully persuaded of his doctrine, and the ad
vantages which all Christians agree are received by him,
such converts will not lay by the scriptures, but by a
constant reading and study of them get all the light they
can from this divine revelation, and nourish themselves
up in the words of faith, and of good doctrine, as St.
Paul speaks to Timothy. But some men will not bear
it, that any one should speak of religion, but according
to the model that they themselves have made of it.
Nay, though he proposes it upon the very terms, and
in the very words which our Saviour and his apostles
preached it in, yet he shall not escape censures and the
severest insinuations. To deviate in the least, or to
omit any thing contained in their articles, is heresy,
under the most invidious names in fashion, and 'tis well
if he escapes being a downright atheist. Whether this
be the way for teachers to make themselves hearkened
to, as men in earnest in religion, and really concerned
for the salvation of men's souls, I leave them to consider.
What success it has had, towards persuading men of the
truth of Christianity, their own complaints of the preva-
lency of atheism, on the one hand, and the number of
deists on the other, sufficiently show.

Another thing laid to my charge, p. 105 and 107, is
my " forgetting, or rather wilful omitting, some plain
" and obvious passages," and some " famous testimo-
" nies in the evangelists ; namely, Matt, xxviii. 19,
" Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of
" the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
And John i. 1, " In the beginning was the Word, and
" the word was with God, and the word was God."
And verse 14, " And the word was made flesh." Mine,
it seems, in this book, are all sins of omission. And yet,
when it came out, the buz, the flutter, and noise which
was made, and the reports which were raised, would
have persuaded the world, that it subverted all morality,
and was designed against the Christian religion. I must
confess, discourses of this kind, which I met with,
spread up and down, at first amazed me ; knowing
the sincerity of those thoughts, which persuaded me
to publish it (not without some hope of doing some

166 A Vindication of the

service to decaying piety, and mistaken and slandered
Christianity.) I satisfied myself against those heats, with
this assurance, that, if there was any thing in my book
against what any one called religion, it was not against
the religion contained in the gospel. And for that, I
appeal to all mankind.

But to return to Mr. Edwards, in particular, I must
take leave to tell him, that if " omitting plain and ob-
" vious passages, the famous testimonies in the evange-
" lists," be a fault in me, I wonder why he, among so
many of this kind that I am guilty of, mentions so few.
For I must acknowledge I have omitted more, nay,
many more, that are " plain and obvious passages, and
" famous testimonies in the evangelists," than those he
takes notice of. But if I have left out none of those
" passages or testimonies," which contain what our
Saviour and his apostles preached, and required assent to,
to make men believers, I shall think my omissions (let
them be what they will) no faults in the present case.
Whatever doctrines Mr. Edwards would have to be be
lieved, if they are such as our Saviour and his apostles
required to be believed, to make a man a Christian, he
will be sure to find them in those preachings and " fa-
" mous testimonies," of our Saviour and his apostles,
that I have quoted. And if they are not there, he may
rest satisfied, that they were not proposed by our Saviour
and his apostles, as necessary to be believed, to make
men Christ's disciples.

If the omission of other texts in the evangelists (which
are all true also, and no one of them to be disbelieved)
be a fault, it might have been expected that Mr. Ed
wards should have accused me for leaving out Matth. i.
18 — 23, and Matth. xxvii. 24, 35, 50, 60, for these are
" plain and obvious passages and famous testimonies in
" the evangelists ;" and such, whereon these articles of
the apostles creed, viz. " born of the virgin Mary, suf-
" fered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and
" buried," are founded. These, being articles of the
apostles creed, are looked upon as " fundamental doc-
" trines :" and one would wonder, why Mr. Edwards
so quietly passes by their omission ; did it not appear,

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 167

that he was so intent on fixing his imputation of so-
cinianism upon me, that, rather than miss that, he was
content to drop the other articles of his creed. For I
must observe to him, that if he had blamed me for the
omission of the places last quoted out of St. Matthew,
(as he had as much reason as for any other,) it would
plainly have appeared, how idle and ill-grounded his
charging socinianism on me was. But, at any rate, he
was to give the book an ill name : not because it was
socinian ; for he has no more reason to charge it with
socinianism for the omissions he mentions, than the
apostles creed. It is therefore well for the compilers of
that creed, that they lived not in Mr. Edwards's days :
for he would, no doubt, have found them " all over
" socinianized," for omitting the texts he quotes, and
the doctrines he collects out of John i. and John xiv.
p. 107, 108. Socinianism then is not the fault of the
book, whatever else it be. For I repeat it again, there
is not one word of socinianism in it. I, that am not so
good at conjectures as Mr. Edwards, shall leave it to
him to say, or to those who can bear the plainness and
simplicity of the gospel, to guess, what its fault is.

Some men are shrewd guessers, and others would be
thought to be so ; but he must be carried far by his for
ward inclination, who does not take notice, that the
world is apt to think him a diviner, for any thing ra
ther than for the sake of truth, who sets up his own
suspicions against the direct evidence of things ; and
pretends to know other men's thoughts and reasons,
better than they themselves. I had said, that the epis
tles, being writ to those who were already believers,
could not be supposed to be writ to them to teach them
fundamentals, without which they could not be be
lievers.

And the reason I gave, why I had not gone through
the writings in the epistles, to collect the fundamental
articles of faith, as I had through the preachings of
our Saviour and the apostles, was, because those funda
mental articles were in those epistles promiscuously,
and without distinction, mixed with other truths. And,
therefore, we shall find and discern those great and ne-

168 A Vindication of the

cessary points best in the preachings of our Saviour and
the apostles, to those who were yet ignorant of the faith,
and unconverted. This, as far as I know my own
thoughts, was the reason why I did (as Mr. Edwards
complains, p. 109) " not proceed to the epistles, and
" not give an account of them, as I had done of the
" gospels and acts." This, I imagined, I had in the
close of my book so fully and clearly expressed, parti
cularly p. 152 of this vol. that I supposed no-body,
how willing soever, could have mistaken me. But this
gentleman is so much better acquainted with me, than
I am with myself ; sees so" deeply into my heart, and
knows so perfectly every thing that passes there ; that
he, with assurance, tells the world, p. 109, " That I
" purposely omitted the epistolary writings of the apo-
" sties, because they are fraught with other fundamen-
" tai doctrines, besides that one which I mention."
And then he goes to enumerate those fundamental arti
cles, p. 110, 111, viz. "The corruption and degeneracy
" of human nature, with the true original of it, (the
" defection of our first parents,) the propagation of sin
" and mortality, our restoration and reconciliation by
" Christ's blood, the eminency and excellency of his
ts priesthood, the efficacy of his death, the full satisfac-
" tion made, thereby, to divine justice, and his being
" made an all-sufficient sacrifice for sin. Christ's
" righteousness, our justification by it, election, adop-
" tion, sarictification, saving faith, the nature of the
" gospel, the new covenant, the riches of God's mercy
" in the way of salvation by Jesus Christ, the certainty
" of the resurrection of human bodies, and of the future
" glory."

Give me leave now to ask you seriously, whether these,
which you have here set down under the title of " fun-
" damental doctrines," are such (when reduced to pro
positions) that every one of them is required to be be
lieved to make a man a Christian, and such as, without
the actual belief thereof, he cannot be saved. If they
are not so, every one of them, you may call them " fun-
" damental doctrines," as much as you please, they are
not of those doctrines of faith I was speaking of, which

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 169

are only such as are required to be actually believed to
make a man a Christian. If you say, some of them are
such necessary points of faith, and others not, you, by
this specious list of well-sounding, but unexplained
terms, arbitrarily collected, only make good what I have
said, viz. that the necessary articles of faith are, in the
epistles, promiscuously delivered with other truths, and,
therefore, they cannot be distinguished but by some
other mark, than being barely found in the epistles. If
you say, that they are all of them necessary articles of
faith, I shall then desire you to reduce them to so many
plain doctrines, and then prove them to be every one of
them required to be believed by every Christian man, to
make him a member of the Christian church. For, to
begin with the first, it is not enough to tell us, as you
do, that " the corruption and degeneracy of human na-
" ture, with the true original of it, (the defection of our
" first parents,) the propagation of sin and mortality,
" is one of the great heads of Christian divinity." But
you are to tell us, what are the propositions we are re
quired to believe concerning this matter: for nothing
can be an article of faith, but some proposition ; and
then it will remain to be proved, that these articles are
necessary to be believed to salvation. The apostles creed
was taken, in the first ages of the church, to contain all
things necessary to salvation ; I mean, necessary to be
believed : but you have now better thought on it, and
are pleased to enlarge it, and we, no doubt, are bound
to submit to your orthodoxy.

The list of materials for his creed (for the articles are
not yet formed) Mr. Edwards closes, p. Ill, with these
words, " These are the matters of faith contained in the
" epistles, and they are essential and integral parts of
" the gospel itself." What, just these ? Neither more
nor less ? If you are sure of it, pray let us have them
speedily, for the reconciling of differences in the Chris
tian church, which has been so cruelly torn, about the
articles of the Christian faith, to the great reproach of
Christian charity, and scandal of our true religion.

Mr. Edwards, having thus, with two learned terms of
" essential and integral parts," sufficiently proved the

170 A Vindication of the

matter in question, viz. That all those he has set down
are articles of faith necessary to be believed to make a
man a Christian, he grows warm at my omission of them.
This I cannot complain of as unnatural : the spirit of
creed-making always rising from an heat of zeal for our
own opinions, and warm endeavours, by all ways possi
ble, to decry and bear down those who differ in a tittle
from us. What then could I expect more gentle and
candid, than what Mr. Edwards has subjoined in these
words ? " And therefore it is no wonder that our au-
" thor, being sensible of this," (viz. That the points he
has named were essential and integral parts of the gospel,)
" would not vouchsafe to give us an abstract of those
" inspired writings [the epistles] ; but passes them by
" with some contempt." Sir, when your angry fit is
over, and the abatement of your passion has given way
to the return of your sincerity, I shall beg you to read
this passage in page 154 of this vol. " These holy writ-
" ers (viz. the pen-men of the scriptures) INSPIRED
" from above, writ nothing but truth, and, in most
" places, very weighty truths to us now, for the ex-
" pounding, clearing, and confirming of the Christian
" doctrine ; and establishing those in it who had em-
" braced it/' And again, p. 156, " The other parts
" of DIVINE REVELATION are objects of faith, and are
" so to be received. They are truths, of which none
" that is once known to be such, i. e. revealed, may or
" ought to be disbelieved." And if this does not satisfy
you, that I have as high a veneration for the epistles, as
you or any one can have, I require you to publish to the
world those passages, which show my contempt of them.
In the mean time, I shall desire my reader to examine
what I have writ concerning the epistles, which is all
contained between p. 151 and 158 of this vol. and then
to judge whether I have made bold with the epistles in
what I have said of them, or this gentleman made bold
with truth in what he has writ of me. Human frailty
will not, I see, easily quit its hold ; what it loses in one
part, it will be ready to regain in another ; and not be
hindered from taking reprisals, even on the most privi
leged sort of men. Mr, Edwards, who is intrenched

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 171

in orthodoxy, and so is as safe in matters of faith almost
as infallibility itself, is yet as apt to err as others in
matters of fact.

But he has not yet done with me about the epistles :
all his fine draught of my slighting that part of the
scripture will be lost, unless the strokes complete it
into socinianism. In his following words you have the
conclusion of the whole matter. His words are these :
" And more especially, if I may conjecture/7 (by all
means, sir, conjecturing is your proper talent : you have
hitherto done nothing else ; and I will say that for you,
you have a lucky hand at it :) " he doth this (i. e. pass
" by the epistles with contempt) because he knew that
" there are so many and frequent, and those so illustri-
" ous and eminent attestations to the doctrine of the
" ever to be adored Trinity, in these epistles." Truly,
sir, if you will permit me to know what I know, as well
as you do allow yourself to conjecture what you please,
you are out for this once ; the reason why I went not .
through the epistles, as I did the gospels and the acts,
was that very reason I printed, and that will be found
so sufficient a one to all considerate readers, that I be
lieve, they will think you need not strain your con
jectures for another. And, if you think it to be so easy
to distinguish fundamentals from non-fundamentals in
the epistles, I desire you to try your skill again, in giv
ing the world a perfect collection of propositions out of
the epistles, that contain all that is required, and no
more than what is absolutely required to be believed by
all Christians, without which faith they cannot be of
Christ's church. For I tell you, notwithstanding the
show you have made, you have not yet done it, nor
will you affirm that you have.

His next page, p. 112, is made up of the same, which
he calls, not uncharitable conjectures. I expound, he
says, " John xiv. 9, &c. after the antitrinitarian mode:"
and I make " Christ and Adam to be sons of God, in
" the same sense, and by their birth, as the racovians
** generally do." I know not but it may be true, that
the antitrinitarians and racovians understand those
places as I do : but it is more than I know, that they

172 A Vindication of the

do so. I took not my sense of those texts from those
writers, but from the scripture itself, giving light to its
own meaning, by one place compared with another :
what in this way appears to me its true meaning, I shall
not decline, because I am told that it is so understood
by the racovians, whom I never yet read ; nor embrace
the contrary, though the " generality of divines " I
more converse with should declare for it. If the sense,
wherein I understand those texts, be a mistake, I shall
be beholden to you, if you will set me right. But they
are not popular authorities, or frightful names, whereby
I judge of truth or falsehood. You will now, no doubt,
applaud your conjectures ; the point is gained, and I
am openly a socinian, since I will not disown, that I
think the Son of God was a phrase, that among the
jews, in our Saviour's time, was used for the Messiah,
though the socinians understand it in the same sense ;
and therefore I must certainly be of their persuasion in
every thing else. I admire the acuteness, force, and
fairness of your reasoning, and so I leave you to triumph
in your conjectures. Only I must desire you to take
notice, that that ornament of our church, and every
way eminent prelate, the late archbishop of Canterbury,
understood that phrase in the same sense that I do, with
out being a socinian. You may read what he says con
cerning Nathanael, in his first " Sermon of Sincerity,"
published this year : his words are these, p. 4, " And
** being satisfied that he [our Saviour] was the Messiah,
" he presently owned him for such, calling him the
" SON of GOD, and the King of Israel."

Though this gentleman knows my thoughts as per
fectly as if he had for several years past lain in my bo
som, yet he is mightily at a loss about my person : as if
it at all concerned the truth contained in my book,
what hand it came from. However, the gentleman is
mightily perplexed about the author. Why, sir, what
if it were writ by a scribbler of Bartholomew-fair drolls,
with all that flourish of declamatory rhetoric, and all
that smartness of wit and jest about captain Tom, uni-
tarians, units, and cyphers, &c. which are to be found
between pages 115 and 123 of a book that came out

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 173

during the merry time of rope dancing, and puppet
plays ? What is truth, would, I hope, nevertheless be
truth in it, however oddly spruced up by such an author:
though perhaps, it is likely some would be apt to say,
such merriment became not the gravity of my subject,
and that I writ not in the style of a graduate in divinity.
I confess (as Mr. Edwards rightly says) my fault lies
on the other side, in a want of " vivacity and elevation :"
and I cannot wonder, that one of his character and
palate, should find out and complain of my flatness,
which has so over-charged my book with plain and di
rect texts of scripture, in a matter capable of no other
proofs. But yet I must acknowledge his excess of civi
lity to me ; he shows me more kindness than I could
expect or wish, since he prefers what I say to him myself
to what is offered to him from the word of God ; and
makes me this compliment, that I begin to mend,
about the close, i. e. when I leave off quoting of scrip
ture : and the dull work was done, of " going through
" the history of the Evangelists and Acts," which he
computes, p. 105, to take up three quarters of my book.
Does not all this deserve, at least, that I should, in re
turn, take some care of his credit ? Which I know not
how better to do, than by entreating him, that when he
takes next in hand such a subject as this, wherein the
salvation of souls is concerned, he would treat it a little
more seriously, and with a little more candour; lest
men should find in his writings, another cause of
atheism, which in this treatise, he has not thought fit to
mention. " Ostentation of wit " in general he has made
a " cause of atheism/' p. 28. But the world will tell
him, that frothy light discourses concerning the serious
matters of religion ; and ostentation of trifling and mis
becoming wit in those who come as ambassadors from
God, under the title of successors of the apostles, in the
great commission of the gospel ; are none of the least
causes of atheism.

Some men have so peculiar a way of arguing, that
one may see it influences them in the repeating another
man's reasoning, and seldom fails to make it their own.
In the next paragraph I find these words; " what makes

174- A Vindication of the

" him contend for one single article, with the exclusion
" of all the rest ? He pretends it is this, that all men
" ought to understand their religion." This, I con
fess, is a reasoning I did not think of; nor could it
hardly, I fear, have been used but by one who had first
took up his opinion from the recommendation of
fashion or interest, and then sought topics to make it
good. Perhaps the deference due to your character,
excused you from the trouble of quoting the page, where
I pretend, as you say ; and it is so little like my way of
reasoning, that I shall not look for it in a book where I
remember nothing of it, and where, without your di
rection, I fear the reader will scarce find it. Though I
have not " that vivacity of thought, that elevation of
" mind," which Mr. Edwards demands, yet common
sense would have kept me from contending that there
is but one article, because all men ought to understand
their religion. Numbers of propositions may be harder
to be remembered,, but it is the abstruseness of the no
tions, or obscurity, inconsistency, or doubtfulness of the
terms or expressions that makes them hard to be under
stood ; and one single proposition may more perplex the
understanding than twenty others. But where did you
find " I contended for one single article, so as to exclude
" all the rest ?" You might have remembered that I
say, p. 1, 17, That the article of the one only true
God, was also necessary to be believed. This might
have satisfied you, that I did not so contend for one ar
ticle of faith, as to be at defiance with more than one.
However, you insist on the word one with great vigour,
from p. 108 to 121. And you did well, you had else
lost all the force of that killing stroke reserved for the
close, in that sharp jest of Unitarians, and a clench or
two more of great moment.

Having found, by a careful perusal of the preachings
of our Saviour and his apostles, that the religion they
proposed, consisted in that short, plain, easy arid intelli
gible summary which I set down, p. 157, in these words :
" Believing Jesus to be the Saviour promised, and tak-
" ing him, now raised from the dead, and constituted
" the Lord and Judge of men, to be their King and

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 175

" Ruler ;" I could not forbear magnifying the wisdom
and goodness of God (which infinitely exceeds the
thoughts of ignorant, vain, and narrow-minded man) in
these following words : " The All-merciful God seems
" herein to have consulted the poor of this world, and
" the bulk of mankind : THESE ARE ARTICLES that the
" labouring and illiterate man may comprehend."
Having thus plainly mentioned more than one article,
I might have taken it amiss, that Mr. Edwards should
be at so much pains as he is, to blame me for " con-
" tending for one" article ; because I thought more
than one could not be understood ; had he not had many
fine things to say in his declamation upon one article,
which affords him so much matter, that less than seven
pages could not hold it. Only here and there, as men
of oratory often do, he mistakes the business, as p. 115,
where he says, " I urge, that there must be nothing in
" Christianity that is not plain, and exactly levelled to
" all men's mother-wit." I desire to know where I
said so, or that " the very manner of every thing in
" Christianity must be clear and intelligible, every thing
" must be presently comprehended by the weakest nod-
" die, or else it is no part of religion, especially of
" Christianity ;" as he has it, p. 119. I am sure it is not
in p. 133 — 136, 149 — 151, of my book : these, therefore,
to convince him that I am of another opinion, I shall
desire somebody to read to Mr. Edwards, for he himself
reads my book with such spectacles, as make him find
meanings and words in it, neither of which I put there.
He should have remembered, that I speak not of all the
doctrines of Christianity, nor all that is published to the
world in it; but of those truths only, which are abso-4
lutely required to be believed to make any one a Chris
tian. And these, I find, are so plain and easy, that I
see no reason why every body, with me, should not mag
nify the goodness and condescension of the Almighty,
who having, out of his free grace, proposed a new law
of faith to sinful and lost man ; hath, by that law, re
quired no harder terms, nothing as absolutely necessary
to be believed, but what is suited to vulgar capacities,
and the comprehension of illiterate men.

176 A Vindication of the

You are a little out again, p. 118, where you ironi
cally say, as if it were my sense, " Let us have but one
" article, though it be with defiance to all the rest."
Jesting apart, sir, this is a serious turn, that what our
Saviour and his apostles preached, and admitted men
into the church for believing, is all that is absolutely
required to make a man a Christian. But this is, with
out any " defiance to all the rest," taught in the word
of God. This excludes not the belief of any of those
many other truths contained in the scriptures of the Old
and New Testaments, which it is the duty of every
Christian to study, and thereby build himself up in our
most holy faith ; receiving with stedfast belief, and ready
obedience, all those things which the spirit of truth
hath therein revealed. But that all the rest of the in
spired writings, or, if you please, " articles, are of equal
" necessity" to be believed to make a man a Christian,
with what was preached by our Saviour and his apostles,
that I deny. A man, as I have shown, may be a Chris
tian and believer, without actually believing them,
because those whom our Saviour and his apostles, by
their preaching and discourses,' converted to the faith,
were made Christians and believers, barely upon the re
ceiving what they preached to them.

I hope it is no derogation to the Christian religion,
to say, that the fundamentals of it, i. e. all that is ne
cessary to be believed in it, by all men, is easy to be
understood by all men. This I thought myself autho
rized to say, by the very easy and very intelligible arti*
cles, insisted on by our Saviour and his apostles ; which
contain nothing but what could be understood by the
bulk of mankind : a term which, I know not why, Mr.
Edwards, p. 117, is offended at ; and thereupon is, after
his fashion, sharp upon me about captain Tom and his
myrmidons, for whom, he tells me, I am " going to
" make a religion." The making of religions and creeds
I leave to others. I only set down the Christian religion
as I find our Saviour and his apostles preached it, and
preached it to, and left it for, the " ignorant and un-
" learned multitude." For I hope you do not think,
how contemptibly soever you speak of the " venerable

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 177

*' mob," as you are pleased to dignify them, p. 117,
that the bulk of mankind, or, in your phrase, the
" rabble," are not concerned in religion, or ought to
understand it, in order to their salvation. Nor are you,
1 hope, acquainted with any who are of that Muscovite
divine's mind, who, to one that was talking to him
about religion, and the other world, replied, That for
the czar, indeed, and bojars, they might be permitted
to raise their hopes to heaven ; but that for such poor
wretches as he, they were not to think of salvation*

I remember the pharisees treated the common people
with contempt, and said, " Have any of the rulers, or
" of the pharisees, believed in him ? But this people,
" who knoweth not the law, are cursed." But yet
these, who in the censure of the pharisees, were cursed,
were some of the poor ; or, if you please to have it so,
the mob, to whom the " gospel was preached " by our
Saviour, as he tells John's disciples, Matt. xi. 5.

Pardon me, sir, that I have here laid these examples
and considerations before you ; a little to prevail with
you not to let loose such a torrent of wit and eloquence
against the " bulk of mankind," another time, and that
for a mere fancy of your own : for I do not see how they
here came in your way ; but that you were resolved to
set up something to have a fling at, and show your
parts, in what you call your " different strain," though
besides the purpose. I know nobody was going to " ask
" the mob, What you must believe?'* And as for me,
I suppose you will take my word for it, that I think no
mob, no, not your " venerable mob," is to be asked,
what I am to believe; nor that " Articles of faith" are
to be " received by the vote of club-men," or any other
sort of men, you will name instead of them.

In the following words, p. 115, you ask, " Whether
" a man may not understand those articles of faith,
" which you mentioned out of the gospels and epistles,
" if they be explained to him, as well as that one, I
" speak of? " It is as the articles are, and as they are
explained. There are articles that have been some
hundreds of years explaining ; which there are many,
and those not of the most illiterate, who profess they dp

K

1 78 A Vindication of the

not yet understand. And to instance in no other, but
" He descended into hell," the learned are not yet
agreed in the sense of it, though great pains have been
taken to explain it.

Next, I ask, Who are to explain your articles ?
The papists will explain some of them one way, and the
reformed another. The remonstrants, and anti-remon
strants, give them different senses. And probably, the
trinitarians and Unitarians will profess, that they un
derstand not each others explications. And at last, I
think it may be doubted, whether any articles, which
need men's explications, can be so clearly and certainly
understood, as one which is made so very plain by the
scripture itself, as not to need any explication at all.
Such is this, that Jesus is the Messiah. For though you
learnedly tell us, that Messiah is a Hebrew word, and no
better understood by the vulgar, than Arabic; yet I
guess it is so fully explained in the New Testament, and
in those places I have quoted out of it, that nobody,
who can understand any ordinary sentence in the scrip
ture, can be at a loss about it. And it is plain, it needs
no other explication, than what our Saviour and the
apostles gave it in their preaching ; for, as they preached
it, men received it, and that sufficed to make them be
lievers.

To conclude, when I heard that this learned gentle
man, who had a name for his study of the scriptures,
and writings on them, had done me the honour to con
sider my treatise, I promised myself, that his degree,
calling, and fame in the world, would have secured to
me something of weight in his remarks, which might
have convinced me of my mistakes ; and, if he had found
any in it, justified my quitting of them. But having ex
amined what, in his, concerns my book, I to my wonder
find, that he has only taken pains to give it an ill name,
without so much as attempting to refute any one
position in it, how much soever he is pleased to make a
noise against several propositions, which he might be
free with, because they are his own : and I have no rea
son to take it amiss if he has shown his zeal and skill
against them. He has been so favourable to what is

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 1 79

mine, as not to use any one argument against any pas
sage in my book. This, which I take for a public testi
mony of his approbation, I shall return him my thanks
for, when I know whether I owe it to his mistake, con
viction, or kindness. But if he writ only for his book
seller's sake, he alone ought to thank him.

AFTER the foregoing papers were sent to the press,
the " Witnesses to Christianity," of the reverend and
learned Dr. Patrick, now lord bishop of Ely, fell into
my hands. I regretted the not having seen it, before I
writ my treatise of the " Reasonableness of Christianity,
" &c." I should then, possibly, by the light given me
by so good a guide, and so great a man, with more con
fidence directly have fallen into the knowledge of
Christianity ; which, in the way T sought it, in its source,
required the comparing of texts with texts, and the
more than once reading over the Evangelists and Acts,
besides other parts of scripture. But I had the ill luck
not to see that treatise, until so few hours since, that I
have had time only to read as far as the end of the in
troduction or first chapter: and there Mr. Edwards
may find, that this pious bishop (whose writings show
he studies, as well as his life that he believes, the scrip
tures) owns what Mr. Edwards is pleased to call, " a
" plausible conceit," which, he says, " I give over and
" over again in these formal words, viz. That nothing
" is required to be believed by any Christian man, but
" this, That Jesus is the Messiah."

The liberty Mr. Edwards takes, in other places, de
serves not it should be taken upon his word, " That
" these formal words " are to be found " over and over
" again " in my book, unless he had quoted the pages.
But I will set him down the " formal words,'* which
are to be found in this reverend prelate's book, p. 14,
" To be the Son of God, and to be Christ, being but
" different expressions of the same thing." Arid, p. 10,
4< It is the very same thing to believe, that Jesus is the
" Christ, and to believe, that Jesus is the Son of God;
" express it how you please. This ALONE is the faith
" which can regenerate a man, and put a divine spirit

180 A Vindication, fyc.

" into him ; that is, make him a conqueror over the
" world, as Jesus was." I have quoted only these few
words ; but Mr. Edwards, if he pleases, or any body
else, may, in this first chapter, satisfy himself more
fully, that the design of it is to show, that in our Sa
viour's time, " Son of God," was a known and received
name and appellation of the Messiah, and so used in
the holy writers. And that the faith that was to make
men Christians, was only the believing, '* that Jesus is
" the Messiah." It is to the truth of this proposition
that he " examines his witnesses/* as he speaks, p. 21.
And this, if I mistake not, in his epistle dedicatory, he
calls " Christianity ; " fol. A 3, where he calls them
" witnesses to Christianity." But these two proposi
tions, viz. That " SON OF GOD," in the gospel, stands
for Messiah ; and that the faith, which alone makes
men Christians, is the believing " Jesus to be the Mes-
" siah," displeases Mr. Edwards so much in my book,
that he thinks himself authorized from them, to charge
me with socinianism, and want of sincerity. How he
will be pleased to treat this reverend prelate, whilst he
is alive (for the dead may, with good manners, be made
bold with) must be left to his decisive authority. This,
I am sure, which way soever he determine, he must,
for the future, either afford me more good company, or
fairer quarter.

A SECOND

VINDICATION

OF THE

REASONABLENESS

OF

CHRISTIANITY, &c.

PREFACE

TO THfi

READER,

IT hath pleased Mr. Edwards, in answer to the " Rea-
" sonableness of Christianity, &c." and its " Vindi-
" cation," to turn one of the most weighty and import
ant points that can come into question (even no less,
than the very fundamentals of the Christian religion),
into a mere quarrel against the author : as every one,
with Mr. Bold, may observe. In my reply to him., I
have endeavoured, as much as his objections would al
low me, to bring him to the subject-matter of my book,
and the merits of the cause ; though his peculiar way of
writing controversy has made it necessary for me in fol
lowing him step by step, to wipe off the dirt he has
thrown on me, and clear myself from those falsehoods he
has filled his book with. This I could not but do, in
dealing with such an antagonist ; that by the untruths
I have proved upon him, the reader may judge of those
other allegations of his, whereof the proof lying on his
side, the bare denial is enough on mine, and, indeed,
are wholly nothing to the truth or falsehood of what is
contained in my " Reasonableness of Christianity, &c."
To which I shall desire the reader to add this farther
consideration from his way of writing, not against my

184 Preface to the Reader.

book, but against me, for writing it, that if he had had
a real concern for truth and religion in this dispute, he
would have treated it after another manner ; and we
should have had from him more argument, reasoning,
and clearness, and less boasting declamation, and rail
ing. It has been unavoidable for me to take notice of
a great deal of this sort of stuff, in answering a writer,
who has very little else to say in the controversy, and
places his strength in things beside the question : but
yet I have been so careful, to take all occasions to ex
plain the doctrine of my book, that I hope the reader
will not think his pains wholly lost labour, in perusing
this reply ; wherein he will find some farther, and, I
hope, satisfying account, concerning the writings of the
New Testament, and the Christian Religion contained
in it.

Mr. Edwards's ill language, which I thought person
ally to me (though I know not how I had provoked a
man whom I had never had to do with), I am now satis
fied, by his rude and scurrilous treating of Mr. Bold, is
his way and strength in management of controversy ;
and therefore requires a little more consideration in this
disputant, than otherwise it would deserve. Mr. Bold,
with the calmness of a Christian, the gravity of a divine,
the clearness of a man of parts, and the civility of a
well-bred man, made some " animadversions " on his
u Socinianism unmasked ;" which, with a sermon preach
ed on the same subject with my " Reasonableness of
" Christianity," he published: and how he has been
used by Mr. Edwards, let the world judge.

I was extremely surprised with Mr. Bold's book, at a
time when there was so great an outcry against mine,
on all hands. But, it seems, he is a man that does not
take up things upon hearsay ; nor is afraid to own truth,
whatever clamour or calumny it may lie under. Mr.
Edwards confidently tells the world, that Mr. Bold has
been drawn in to espouse this cause, upon base and mean
considerations. Whose picture of the two, such a de
scription is most likely to give us, I shall leave to the
reader to judge, from what he will find in their writings
on this subject. For as to the persons themselves, I am

Preface to the Reader. 185

equally a stranger to them both : I know not the face
of either of them : and having hitherto never had any
communication with Mr. Bold, I shall begin with him,
as I did with Mr. Edwards in print ; and here publicly
return him this following acknowledgment, for what he
has printed in this controversy.

To Mr. BOLD.

SIR,

THOUGH I do not think I ought to return thanks
to any one, for being of my opinion, any more than
to fall out with him, for differing from me; yet I
cannot but own to all the world, the esteem, that I think
is due to you, for that proof you have given, of a mind
and temper becoming a true minister of the gospel ; in
appearing as you have done, in the defence of a point,
a great point of Christianity, which it is evident you
could have no other temptation to declare for, but the
love of truth. It has fared with you herein no better
than with me. For Mr. Edwards not being able to
answer your arguments, he has found out already, that
you are a mercenary, defending a cause against your per
suasion for hire ; and that you " are sailing to Racovia
" by a side-wind :" such inconsistencies can one (whose
business it is to rail for a cause he cannot defend) put
together to make a noise with : and he tells you plainly,
what you must expect, if you write any more on this
argument, viz. to be pronounced a downright apostate
and renegade.

As soon as I saw your sermon and animadversions, I
wondered what scarecrow Mr. Edwards would set up
wherewith he might hope to deter men of more caution
than sense, from reading of them ; since socinianism,
from which you were known to be as remote as he, I
concluded would not do. The unknown author of the
" Reasonableness of Christianity," he might make a
socinian, mahometan, atheist, or what sort of raw-head
and bloody-bones he pleased. But I imagined he had
had more sense than to venture any such aspersions, on

186 Preface to the Reader.

a man whom, though I have not yet the happiness per
sonally to know ; yet, I know, hath justly a great and
settled reputation amongst worthy men : and I thought
that that coat, which you had worn with so much repu
tation, might have preserved you from the bespatterings
of Mr. Edwards's dunghill. But what is to be expected
from a warrior that hath no other ammunition, and yet
ascribes to himself victory from hence, and, with this
artillery, imagines he carries all before him ? And so
Skimmington rides in triumph, driving all before him,
by the ordures that he bestows on those that come in his
way. And, were not Christianity concerned in the case,
a man would scarce excuse to himself the ridiculousness
of entering into the list with such a combatant. I do
not, therefore, wonder that this mighty boaster, having
no other way to answer the books of his opponents, but
by popular calumnies, is fain to have recourse to his
only refuge, and lay out his natural talent in vilifying
and slandering the author. But I see, by what you have
already writ, how much you are above that ; and as you
take not up your opinions from fashion or interest, so
you quit them not, to avoid the malicious reports of
those that do : out of which number, they can hardly
be left, who (unprovoked) mix, with the management
of their cause, injuries and ill-language, to those they
differ from. This, at least, I am sure, zeal or love for
truth can never permit falsehood to be used in the de
fence of it.

Your mind, I see, prepared for truth, by resignation
of itself, not to the traditions of men, but the doctrine
of the gospel, has made you more readily entertain, and
more easily enter into the meaning of my book, than
most I have heard speak of it. And since you seem to
me to comprehend what I have laid together, with the
same disposition of mind, and in the same sense that
I received it from the holy scriptures, I shall, as a mark
of my respect to you, give you a particular accoun
of it.

The beginning of the year in which it was published
the controversy that made so much noise and heat
amongst some of the dissenters, coming one day acci-

Preface to the Reader. 187

dentally into my mind, drew me, by degrees, into a
stricter and more thorough inquiry into the question
about justification. The scripture was direct and plain,
that it was faith that justified : The next question then,
was, What faith that was that justified ; what it was
which, if a man believed, it should be imputed to him
for righteousness? To find out this, I thought the*right
way was, to search the scriptures ; and thereupon be
took myself seriously to the reading of the New Testa-j
ment, only to that purpose. What that produced, you
and the world have seen.

The first view I had of it seemed mightily to satisfy
my mind, in the reasonableness and plainness of this
doctrine ; but yet the general silence I had in my little
reading met with, concerning any such thing, awed ine
with the apprehension of singularity ; until going on in|
the gospel-history, the whole tenour of it made it so clearA
and visible, that I more wondered that every body did,
not see and embrace it ; than that I should assent to
what was so plainly laid down, and so frequently incul
cated in holy writ, though systems of divinity said no
thing of it. That which added to my satisfaction was,
that it led me into a discovery of the marvellous and*
divine wisdom of our Saviour's conduct, in all the ci
cumstances of his promulgating this doctrine ; as well as
of the necessity that such a law-giver should be sent from
God, for the reforming the morality of the world ; two
points, that, I must confess, I had not found so fully
and advantageously explained in the books of divinity I
had met with, as the history of the gospel seemed to
me, upon an attentive perusal, to give occasion and mat
ter for. But the necessity and wisdom of our Saviour's
opening the doctrine (which he came to publish) as he
did in parables and figurative ways of speaking, carries
such a thread of evidence through the whole history of
the evangelists, as, I think, is impossible to be resisted ;
and makes it a demonstration, that the sacred historians
did not write by concert, as advocates for a bad cause,
or to give colour and credit to an imposture they would
usher into the world : since they, every one of them, in
some place or other, omit some passages of our Saviour's

188 Preface to the Reader.

life, or circumstance of his actions ; which show the
wisdom and wariness of his conduct ; and which, even
those of the evangelists who have recorded, do barely
and transiently mention, without laying any stress on
them, or making the least remark of what consequence
they are, to give us our Saviour's true character, and to
prove the truth of their history. These are evidences
of truth and sincerity, which result alone from the na
ture of things, and cannot be produced by any art or
contrivance.

How much I was pleased with the growing discovery,
every day, whilst I was employed in this search, I need
not say. The wonderful harmony, that the farther I
went disclosed itself, tending to the same points, in all
the parts of the sacred history of the gospel, was of no
small weight with me and another person, who every
day, from the beginning to the end of my search, saw
the progress of it, and knew, at my first setting out,
that I was ignorant whither it would lead me ; and there
fore, every day asked me, What more the scripture had
taught me? So far was I -from the thoughts of socinian-
ism, or an intention to write for that, or any other party,
or to publish any thing at all. But, when I had gone
through the whole, and saw what a plain, simple, reason
able thing Christianity was, suited to all conditions and
capacities ; and in the morality of it now, with divine
authority, established into a legible law, so far surpassing
all that philosophy and human reason had attained to,
or could possibly make effectual to all degrees of man
kind ; I was flattered to think it might be of some use
in the world ; especially to those, who thought either
that there was no need of revelation at all, or that the
revelation of our Saviour required the belief of such ar
ticles for salvation, which the settled notions, and their
way of reasoning in some, and want of understanding
in others, made impossible to them. Upon these two
topics the objections seemed to turn, which were with
most assurance made by deists, against Christianity ; but
against Christianity misunderstood. It seemed to me,
'that there needed no more to show them the weakness
of their exceptions, but to lay plainly before them the

Preface to the Reader. 189

doctrine of our Saviour and his apostles, as delivered in
the scriptures, and not as taught by the several sects of
Christians.

This tempted me to publish it, not thinking it de
served an opposition from any minister of the gospel ;
and least of all, from any one in the communion of the
church of England. But so it is, that Mr. Edvvards's
zeal for .he knows not what (for he does not yet know
his own creed, nor what is required to make him a Chris
tian) could not brook so plain, simple, and intelligible a
religion ; but yet, not knowing what to say against it,
and the evidence it has from the word of God, he thought
fit to let the book alone, and fall upon the author. What
great matter he has done in it, I need not tell you, who
have seen and showed the weakness of his wranglings.
You have here, Sir, the true history of the birth of my
" Reasonableness of Christianity, as delivered in the
" Scriptures," and my design in publishing it, &c.
What it contains, and how much it tends to peace and
union among Christians, if they would receive Chris
tianity as it is, you have discovered. I am,

SIR,

Your most humble servant,

A. B.

My readers will pardon me, that, in my preface to
them, I make this particular address to Mr. Bold. He
hath thought it worth his while to defend my book.
How well he has done it, I am too much a party to say.
I think it so sufficient to Mr. Edwards, that I needed
not to have troubled myself any farther about him, on
the account of any argument that remained in his book
to be answered. But a great part of the world judging
of the contests about truth^ as they do of popular elec
tions, that the side carries it where the greatest noise is;
it was necessary they should be undeceived, and be let
see, that sometimes such writers may be let alone, not
because they cannot, but because they deserve not to
be answered.

1 90 Preface to the Reader.

This farther I ought to acknowledge to Mr. Bold,
and own to the world, that he hath entered into the true
sense of my treatise, and his notions do so perfectly agree
with mine, that I shall not be afraid, by thoughts and
expressions very like his, in this my second vindication,
to give Mr. Edwards (who is exceedingly quick-sight
ed, and positive in such matters) a handle to tell the
world, that either I borrowed this my " vindication"
from Mr. Bold, or writ his " animadversions" for him.
The former of these I shall count no discredit, if Mr.
Edwards think fit to charge me with it; and the latter,
Mr. Bold's character is answer enough to. Though
the impartial reader, I doubt not, will find, that the
same uniform truth considered by us, suggested the
same thoughts to us both, without any other communi
cation.

There is another author who in a civ Her style hath
made it necessary for me to vindicate my book from a
reflection or two of his, wherein he seems to come short
of that candour he professes. All that I shall say on this
occasion here, is, that it is a wonder to me, that having
published what I thought the scripture told me was the
faith that made a Christian, and desired, that if I was
mistaken, anyone that thought so, would have the good
ness to inform me better ; so many with their tongues,
and some in print, should intemperately find fault
with a poor man out of his way, who desires to be set
right ; and no one, who blames his faith, as coming
short, will tell him what that faith is, which is required
to make him a Christian. But I hope, that amongst so
many censurers, I shall at last find one, who knowing
himself to be a Christian upon other grounds than I am,
will have so much Christian charity, as to show me
what more is absolutely necessary to be believed, by
me, and every man, to make him a Christian.

A SECOND

VINDICATION

OF THE

REASONABLENESS

OF

C II R I S T I A N I T Y, &c

A CAUSE that stands in need of falsehoods to support
it, and an adversary that will make use of them, de
serve nothing but contempt; which I doubt not but
every considerate reader thought answer enough to
" Mr. Edwards's Socinianism unmasked." But, since,
in his late " Socinian creed," he says, " I would have
" answered him if I could," that the interest of Chris
tianity may not suffer by my silence, nor the contempti-
bleness of his treatise afford him matter of triumph
among those who lay any weight on such boasting, it is
fit it should be shown what an arguer he is, and how
well he deserves, for his performance, to be dubbed, by
himself, " irrefragable."

Those who, like Mr. Edwards, dare to publish in
ventions of their own, for matters of fact, deserve a

192 A Second Vindication of the

name so abhorred, that it finds not room in civil con
versation. This secures him from the proper answer,
due to his imputations to me, in print, of matters of fact
utterly false, which, without any reply of mine, fix upon
him that name (which, without a profligate mind, a
man cannot expose himself to) till he hath proved them.
Till then, he must wear what he has put upon himself.
This being1 a rule, which common justice hath prescribed
to the private judgments of mankind, as well as to the
public judicature of courts, that all allegations of facts,
brought by contending parties, should be presumed to
be false, till they are proved.

There are two ways of making a book unanswerable.
The one is by the clearness, strength, and fairness of the
argumentation. Men who know how to write thus, are
above bragging what they have done, or boasting to the
world that their adversaries are baffled. Another way to
make a book unanswerable, is to lay a stress on matters
of fact foreign to the question, as well as to truth ; and
to stuff it with scurrility and fiction. This hath been
always so evident to common sense, that no man, who
had any regard to truth, or ingenuity, ever thought
matters of fact besides the argument, and stories made
at pleasure, the way of managing controversies. Which
showing only the want of sense and argument, could,
if used on both sides, end in nothing but downright
railing : and he must always have the better of the
cause, who has lying and impudence on his side.

The un masker, in the entrance of his book, sets a
great distance between his and my way of writing. I
am not sorry that mine differs so much as it does from
his. If it were like his, I should think, like his, it
wanted the author's commendations. For, in his first
paragraph, which is all laid out in his own testimony of
his own book, he so earnestly bespeaks an opinion of
mastery in politeness, order, coherence, pertinence,
strength, seriousness, temper, and all the good qualities
requisite in controversy, that I think, since he pleases
himself so much with his own good opinion, one in
pity ought not to go about to rob him of so considerable
an admirer. I shall not, therefore, contest any of those

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 193

excellencies he ascribes to himself, or faults he blames
in me, in the management of the dispute between us,
any farther than as particular passages of his book, as I
come to examine them, shall suggest unavoidable remarks
to me. I think the world does not so much concern
itself about him, or me, that it need be told in that in
ventory, he has given of his own good parts, in his first
paragraph, which of us two has the better hand at
" flourishes, jesting, and common-places ; " if I am,
as he says, p. 2, troubled with " angry fits, and passionate
" ferments, which, though I strive to palliate, are easily
" discernible, &c." and he be more laudably ingenuous
in the openness of that temper, which he shows in every
leaf; I shall leave to him the entire glory of boasting
of it. Whatever we brag of our performances, they will
be just as they are, however lie may think to add to his,
by his own encomium on them. The difference in style,
order, coherence, good breeding, (for all those, amongst
others, the unmasker mentions,) the reader will observe,
whatever I say of them ; and at best they are nothing
to the question in hand. For though I am a " tool,
" pert, childish, starch'd, impertinent, incoherent, tri-
" fling, weak, passionate, &c." commendations I meet
with before I get to the 4th page, besides what follows,
as " upstart racovian," p. 24, " flourishing scrib-
" bier," p. 41, "dissembler," 106, "pedantic," 107:
I say, although I am all this, and what else he liberally
bestows on me in the rest of his book, I may have
truth on my side, and that in the present case serves
my turn.

Having thus placed the laurels on his own head, and
sung applause to his own performance, "he, p. 4, enters,
as he thinks, upon his business, which ought to be, as he
confesses, p. 3, " to make good his former charges."
The first whereof he sets down in these words : That
" I unwarrantably crowded all the necessary articles
" of faith into one, with a design of favouring soci-
" nianism."

If it may be permitted to the subdued, to be so bold
with one, who is already conqueror, I desire to know,
where that proposition is laid down in these terms, as

o

194 A Second Vindication of the

laid to my charge. Whether it be true, or false, shall,
if he pleases, be hereafter examined : but it is not, at
present, the matter in question. There are certain
propositions, which he having1 affirmed, and I denied,
are under debate between us : and that the dispute may
not run into an endless ramble, by multiplying of new,
before the points in contest are decided, those ought
first to be brought to an issue.

To go on, therefore, in the order of his " Socinianism
" unmasked," (for, p. 3, he has, out of the Mishna,
taught me good breeding, " to answer the first, and so
" in order/') The next thing he has against me is p. 5,
which that the reader may understand the force of, I
must inform him,, that in p. 105 of his " Thoughts
" concerning the causes of atheism," he said, that I
" give this plausible conceit," as he calls it, " over
" and over again, in these formal words/' viz. " That
" nothing is required to be believed by any Christian
" man, but this, that Jesus is the Messiah." This I
denied. To make it good, " Socinianism unmasked/*
p. 5, he thus argues. First, " It is observable, that this
" guilty man would be shifting off the indictment, by
" excepting against the formality of words, as if such
" were not to be found in his book ; but when doth he
" do this ? In the close of it, when this matter was ex-
" hausted, and he had nothing else to say/' Vind.
p. 113, " then he bethinks himself of his salvo, &c."
Answ. As if a falsehood were ever the less a falsehood,
because it was not opposed, or would grow into a truth,
if it were not taken notice of, before the 38th page of
the answer. I desire him to show me these " formal
" words over and over again," in my " Reasonableness
" of Christianity : " nor let him hope to evade, by saying,
I would be " shifting, by excepting against the forma-
" lity of the words."

To say, that " I have, over and over again, those for-
" mal words," in my book, is an assertion of a matter
of fact ; let him produce the words, and justify his
allegation, or confess, that this is an untruth published
to the world : and since he makes so bold with truth,
in a matter visible to every body, let the world be

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 195

judge, what credit is to be given to his allegations of
matters of fact, in things foreign to what I have print
ed ; and that are not capable of a negative proof. A
sample whereof the reader has at the entrance, in his
introduction, p. A. 4, and the three or four following
pages. Where he affirms to the world, not only what
I know to be false ; but that every one must see, he
could not know to be true. For he pretends to know
and deliver my thoughts. And what the character is
of one that confidently affirms what he does not know,
nobody need be told.

But he adds, " I had before pleaded to the indict-
" ment, and thereby owned it to be true/' This is to
make good his promise, p. 3, to keep at a distance from
my " feeble stragglings." Here this strong arguer must
prove, that what is not answered or denied, in the very
beginning of a reply, or before the llth page, " is
" owned to be true/' In the mean time, 'till he does
that, I shall desire such of my readers, as think the un-
masker's veracity worth examining, to see in my Vindi
cation, from p. 174, &c. wherein is contained, what I
have said about one article, whether I have owned what
he charged me with, on that subject.

This proposition then remains upon him still to be
proved, viz.

I. " That I have, over and over again, these formal
" words in my Reasonableness of Christianity, viz.
" That nothing is required to be believed by any
" Christian man, but this, That Jesus is the Mes-
" siah."

He goes on, p. 5, " And indeed he could do no
" other, for it was the main work he set himself about,
" to find but one article of faith in all the chapters of
" the four evangelists, and the acts of the apostles ; "
this is to make good his promise, p. 3, " To clear his
" book from those sorry objections and cavils 1 had
" raised against it." Several of my " sorry objections
" and cavils " were to represent to the reader, that a
great part of what is said was nothing but suspicions and

o 2

196 A Second Vindication of the

conjectures ; and such he could not but then own them
to be. But now he has rid himself of all his conjec
tures ; and has raised them up into direct, positive af
firmations, which, being said with confidence without
proof, who can deny but he has cleared, thoroughly
cleared, that part from my " sorry objections and ca-
" vils ? " He says, " it was the main work I set myself
" about, to find but one article of faith." This I must
take the liberty to deny ; and I desire him to prove it.
A man may " set himself to find two," or as many as
there be, and yet find but one : or a man may " set
" himself to find but one/' and yet find two more. It
is no argument, from what a man has found, to prove
what was his main work to find, unless where his aim
was only to find what there was, whether more or less.
For a writer may find the reputation of a poor con
temptible railer ; nay of a downright impudent lyar ;
and yet nobody will think it was his main work to find
that. Therefore, sir, if you will not find what it is like
you did not seek, you must prove those many confident
assertions you have published, which I shall give you
in tale, whereof this is the second, viz.

II. " That the main business I set myself about, was
" to find but one article of faith."

In the following part of this sentence, he quotes my
own words with the pages where they are to be found :
the first time, that, in either of his two books against
me, he has vouchsafed to do so, concerning one article,
wherewith he has made so much noise. My words in
(p. 102 of) my " Reasonableness of Christianity" stand
thus : " for that this is the sole doctrine pressed and re-
" quired to be believed, in the whole tenour of our Sa-
" viour's and his apostles preaching, we have showed,
" through the whole history of the Evangelists and Acts,
" and I challenge them to show, that there was any
" other doctrine upon their assent to which, or disbelief
" of it, men were pronounced believers, or unbelievers,
* and accordingly received into the church of Christ,
" as members of his body, as far as mere believing

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 197

" could make them so ; or else kept out. This was the
" only gospel article of faith, which was preached to
" them." Out of this passage, the unmasker sets down
these words, " This is the SOLE doctrine pressed and
" required to be believed, in the whole tenour of our
" Saviour's and his apostles preaching," p. 129, " this
" was the ONLY gospel article of faith, which was
" preached to them."

I shall pass by all other observations, that this way of
citing these words would suggest, and only remark, that,
if he brought these words, to prove the immediately
preceding assertion of his, viz. That " to find out but
" one article of faith was the main work I set myself
" about/' this argument, reduced into form, will stand
thus :

He who says, that this is the sole doctrine pressed and
required to be believed in the whole tenour of our Sa
viour's and his apostles preaching, upon their assent to
which, or disbelief of it, men were pronounced believers,
or unbelievers, and accordingly received into the church
of Christ, as members of his body, as far as mere believ
ing could make them so, or else kept out ; sets himself
to find out but one article of faith, as his main work.
But the vindicator did so : ergo,

If this were the use he would make of those words of
mine cited, I must desire him to prove the major. But
he talks so freely, and without book every-where, that I
suppose he thought himself, by the privilege of a de-
claimer, exempt from being called strictly to an account,
for what he loosely says, and from proving what he
should be called to an account for. Rail lustily, is a
good rule ; something of it will stick, true or false,
proved or not proved.

If he' alleges these words of mine, to answer my de
mand, Vind. p. 175, where he found that " I contended
" for one single article of faith, with the exclusion and
" defiance of all the rest," which he had charged me
with ; I say, it proves this as little as the former. For
to say, " That I had showed through the whole history
" of the Evangelists, and the Acts, that this is the sole
" doctrine, or only gospel article pressed and required

198 A Second Vindication of the

" to be believed in the whole ten our of our Saviour and
" his apostles preaching; upon their assent to which,
" or disbelieving of it, men were pronounced believers
" or unbelievers, and accordingly received into the
" church of Christ, or kept out ; " is the simple asser
tion of a positive matter of fact, and so carries in it no
defiance, no,, nor exclusion of any other doctrinal, or
historical truth, contained in the scripture : and there
fore it remains still on the unmasker to show, where it
is I express any defiance of any other truth contained
in the word of God ; or where I exclude any one doctrine
of the scriptures. So that if it be true, that " I contend
" for one article," my contention may be without any
defiance, or so much as exclusion, of any of the rest,
notwithstanding any thing contained in these words.
Nay, if it should happen that I am in a mistake, and that
this was not the sole doctrine, which our Saviour and
his apostles preached, and, upon their assent to which,
men were admitted into the church : yet the un masker's
accusation would be never the truer for that, unless it
be necessary, that he that mistakes in one matter of fact,
should be at defiance with all other truths ; or, that he
who erroneously says, that our Saviour and his apostles
admitted men into the church, upon the believing him
to be the Messiah, does thereby exclude all other truths
published to the jews before, or to Christian believers
afterwards.

If these words be brought to prove that I contended
" for one article/' barely " one article," without any
defiance or exclusion annexed to that contention ; I say
neither do they prove that, as is manifest from the words
themselves, as well as from what I said elsewhere, con
cerning the article of one God. For here, I say, this
is the only gospel article, &c. upon which men were
pronounced believers ; which plainly intimates some
other article, known and believed in the world before,
and without the preaching of the gospel.

To this the unmasker thinks he has provided a salvo,
in these words, " Socinianism unmasked," p. 6, " And
" when I told him of this one article, he knew well
" enough, that I did not exclude the article of the

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 199

" Deity, for that is a principle of natural religion/'
If it be fit for an un masker to perceive what is in
debate, he would know, that the question is not, what
he excluded, or excluded not, but what articles he
charged me to have excluded.

Taking it therefore to be his meaning, (which it must
be, if he meant any thing to the purpose), viz. That
when he charged me so often and positively, for contest
ing for " one article," viz. that " Jesus was the Mes-
" siah," he did not intend to accuse me for excluding
" the article of the Deity." To prove that he did not so
intend it, he tells me, that " I knew that he did not."

Answ. How should I know it? He never told me so,
either in his book, or otherwise. This I know, that he
said, p. 115, that " I contended for one article, with the
" exclusion of all the rest." If then the belief of the
Deity be an article of faith, and be not the article of
Jesus being the Messiah, it is one " of the rest ;" and
if " all the rest " were excluded, certainly that, being
one of " all the rest," must be excluded. How then
he could say, " I knew that he excluded it not/' i. e.
meant not that I excluded it, when he positively says, I
did " exclude it," I cannot tell, unless he thought that
I knew him so well, that when he said one thing, I knew
that he meant another, and that the quite contrary.

He now, it seems, acknowledges that I affirmed,
that the belief of the Deity, as well as of Jesus being
the Messiah, was required to make a man a believer.
The believing in " one God, the Father Almighty,
" maker of heaven and earth," is one article ; and in
" Jesus Christ, his only Son our Lord," is another ar
ticle. These, therefore, being " two articles," and
both asserted by me, to be required to make a man a
Christian, let us see with what truth or ingenuity the un-
masker could apply, besides that above mentioned, these
following expressions to me, as he does without any ex
ception : " Why then must there be one article and no
" more?" p. 115. " Going to make a religion for his
" myrmidons, he contracts all into one article, and will
" trouble them with no more," p. 117. " Away with
" systems, away with creeds, let us have but one article,

200 A Second Vindication of the

" though it be with defiance to all the rest," p. 118.
" Thus we see, why he reduces ail belief to that one
" article before rehearsed," p. 120. And all this with
out any the least exception of the article of a Deity, as
he now pretends. Nor could he, .indeed, as is evident
from his own words, p. 121, 122 : " To conclude, this
" gentleman and his fellows are resolved to be unita-
" rians ; they are for one article of faith, as well as
" One person in the Godhead : — But, if these learned
" men were not prejudiced, — they would perceive, that,
" when the catholic faith is thus brought down to one
" single article, it will soon be reduced to none ; the
" unit will dwindle into a cypher." By which the
reader may see that his intention was,, to persuade the
world, that I reduced ALL BELIEF, the CATHOLIC
FAITH, (they are in his own words,) " to one single ar-
" tide, and no more." For if he had given but the
least hint, that I allowed of Two, all the wit and
strength of argument, contained in Unitarians., unit and
cypher, with which he winds up all, had been utterly
lost, and dwindled into palpable nonsense.

To demonstrate that this was the sense he would be
understood in, we are but to observe what he says again,
p. 50 of his " Socinianism unmasked," where he tells
his readers, that " I and my friends have new-modelled
" the apostles creed ; yea, indeed, have presented them
" with ONE article, instead of TWELVE." And hence
we may see, what sincerity there is, in the reason he
brings, to prove that he did not exclude the " article
" of the Deity." " For, says he, p. 6, that is a prin-
" ciple of natural religion."

Answ. Ergo, he did not in positive words, without
any exception, say, I reduced " all belief, the catholic
" faith, to one single article, and no more." But to
make good his promise, " not to resemble me in the
" little artifices of evading," he wipes his mouth, and
says at the bottom of this page, " But the reader sees
" his [the vindicator's] shuffling." Whilst the article
of " One God" is a part of " ALL belief, a part of the
" catholic faith," ALL which he affirmed I excluded,
but the one article concerning the Messiah ; every one

Reasonableness of Christianity , 8$c. £01

will see where the shuffling is : and, if it be not clear
enough from those words themselves, let those above
quoted, out of p. 50, of his " Socinianism unmasked/'
where he says, that " I have new modelled the apostles
" creed, and presented the world with ONE article in-
" stead of TWELVE," be an interpretation of them.
For, if the article of " one eternal God, maker of hea-
" ven and earth," be one of the articles of the apostles
creed, and the one article I presented them with, be
not that, it is plain, he did, and would be understood
to mean, that by my one article, I excluded that of the
one eternal God, which branch soever of religion, either
natural, or revealed, it belongs to.

I do not endeavour to " persuade the reader," as he
says, p. 6, " that he misunderstood me," but yet every
body will see that he misrepresented me. And I chal
lenge him to say, that those expressions above quoted
out of him, concerning " one article," in the obvious
sense of the words, as they stand in his accusation of
me, were true.

This flies so directly in his face, that he labours
mightily to get it off, and therefore adds these words,
" My discourse did not treat (neither doth his book run
" that way) of principles of natural religion, but of the
" revealed, and particularly the Christian : accordingly,
" this was it that I taxed him with, That, of all the
" principles and articles of Christianity, he chose out
" but one, as necessary to be believed to make a man a
" Christian."

Answ. His book was of atheism, which one

may think should make his " discourse treat of natural
" religion." But I pass by that, and bid him tell me
where he taxed me, " That, of all the principles and ar-
" tides of Christianity, I chose out but one : " let him
show, in all his discourse, but such a word, or any thing
said, like " one article of Christianity," and I will grant
that he meant particularly, but spoke generally ; misled
his reader, and left himself a subterfuge. But if there
be no expression to be found in him, tending that way,
all this is but the covering of one falsehood with another,
which thereby only becomes the grosser. Though if he

202 A Second Vindication of the

had in express words taxed me, That, of all the prin
ciples and articles of the Christian religion, I chose
out but one, that would not at all help him, till he far
ther declares, that the belief of one God is not an " ar-
" tide of the Christian religion." For, of " ALT, the
" articles of the Christian religion," he says, " I chose
" but one ; " which not being that of a Deity, his words
plainly import, that that was left out amongst the rest,
unless it be possible for a man to choose but one article
of the Christian religion, viz. That " Jesus is the Mes-
" siah ; " and at the same time, to choose two articles
of the Christian religion, viz. That there is one eternal
God, and that Jesus is the Messiah. If he had spoken
clearly, and like a fair man, he should have said, That
he taxed me with choosing but one article of revealed
religion. This had been plain and direct to his purpose :
but then he knew the falsehood of it would be too ob
vious : for, in the seven pages, wherein he taxes me so
much with One article, Christianity is several times
named, though not once to the purpose he here pre
tends. But revelation is not so much as once mentioned
in them, nor, as I remember, in any of the pages he
bestows upon me.

To conclude, the several passages above quoted out
of him, concerning one sole article, are all in general
terms, without any the least limitation or restriction ;
and, as they stand in him, fit to persuade the reader,
that I excluded all other articles whatsoever, but that
one, of " Jesus the Messiah :" and if, in that sense, they
are not true, they are so many falsehoods of his, repeated
there, to mislead others into a wrong opinion of me.
For, if he had a mind his readers should have been rightly
informed, why was it not as easy once to explain him
self, as so often to affirm it in general and unrestrained
terms ? This, all the boasted strength of the un masker
will not be able to get him out of. This very well be
comes one, who so loudly charges me with shuffling.
Having repeated the same thing over and over again,
in as general terms as was possible, without any the
least limitation, in the whole discourse, to have nothing
else to plead when required to prove it, but that it was

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 203

meant in a limited sense, in an unmasker, is not shuf
fling. For, by this way, he may have the convenience
to say, and unsay, what he pleases ; to vent what stuff
he thinks for his turn ; and, when he is called to account
for it, reply, He meant no such thing. Should any one
publish, that the unmasker had but " one article of faith,
" and no more," viz. That the doctrines in fashion,
and likely to procure preferment, are alone to be re
ceived ; that all his belief was comprised in this " one
" single article : " and when such a talker was de
manded to prove his assertion, should he say, he meant
to except his belief of the apostles creed : would he not,
notwithstanding such a plea, be thought a shuffling
lyar ? And, if the unmasker can no otherwise prove
those universal propositions above cited, but by saying,
he meant them with a tacit restriction, (for none is ex
pressed,) they will still, and for ever remain to be ac
counted for, by his veracity.

What he says in the next paragraph, p. 7, of my
" splitting one article into two," is just of the same
force, and with the same ingenuity. I had said, That
the belief of one God was necessary ; which is not de
nied : I had also said, " That the belief of Jesus of Na-
" zareth to be the Messiah, together with those con-
" comitant articles of his resurrection, rule, and com-
" ing again to judge the world, was necessary, p. 151.
" And again, p. 157, That God had declared, whoever
" would believe Jesus to be the Saviour promised, and
" take him now raised from the dead, and constituted
" the Lord arid Judge of all men, to be their King and
" Ruler, should be saved." This made me say, " These,
" and those articles " (in words of the plural number)
more than once ; evidence enough to any but a caviller,
that I " contend not for one single article, and no
" more." And to mind him of it, I, in my Vindica
tion, reprinted one of those places, where I had done so ;
and, that he might not, according to his manner, over
look what does not please him, the words, THESE ARE
ARTICLES, were printed in great characters. Where
upon he makes this remark, p. 7, " And though since
" he has tried to split this one into two, p. 28, yet

A Second Vindication of the

" he labours in vain : for to believe Jesus to be the
" Messiah, amounts to the same with believing him to
" be King and Ruler ; his being anointed, (i. e. being
" the Messiah,) including that in it : yet he has the va-
" nityto add in great characters, THESE AUE ARTICLES;
" as if the putting them into these great letters, would
" make one article two."

Ans. Though no letters will make one article two;
yet that there is one God, and Jesus Christ his only Son
our Lord, who rose again from the dead, ascended into
heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God, shall come
to judge the quick and the dead, are, in the apostles
creed, set down as more than one article, and therefore
may, very properly, be called THESE ARTICLES, without
splitting one into two.

What, in my " Reasonableness of Christianity," I
have said of one article, I shall always owrn ; and in what
sense I have said it, is easy to be understood ; and with
a man of the least candour, whose aim was truth, and
not wrangling, it would not have occasioned one word
of dispute. But as for this unmasker, who makes it his
business, not to convince me of any mistakes in my
opinion, but barely to misrepresent me ; my business
at present with him is, to show the world, that what he
has captiously and scurrilously said of me, relating to
one article, is false ; arid that he neither has, nor can
prove one of those assertions concerning it, above cited
out of him, in his own words. Nor let him pretend a
meaning against his direct words : such a caviller as he,
who would shelter himself under the pretence of a mean
ing, whereof there are no footsteps ; whose disputes are
only calumnies directed against the author, without ex
amining the truth or falsehood of what I had published ;
is not to expect the allowances one would make to a fair
and ingenuous adversary, who showed so much concern
for truth, that he treated of it with a seriousness due to
the weightiness of the matter, and used other argu
ments, besides obloquy, clamour and falsehoods, against
what he thought errour. And therefore I again posi
tively demand of him to prove these words of his to be
true, or confess that he cannot ; viz.

Reasonableness of Christianity, $$c. 205

III. " That I contend for one article of faith, with
" the exclusion and defiance of all the rest."

Two other instances of this sort of arguments, I gave
in the 175th page of my Vindication, out of the 115th
and 119th pages of his " Thoughts concerning the causes
" of atheism ; " and I here demand of him again to show,
since he has not thought fit hitherto to give any answer
to it,

IV. " Where I urge, that there must be nothing in
" Christianity, that is not plain, and exactly le-
" veiled to all men's mother- wit, and every com-
" mon apprehension."

Or, where he finds, in my " Reasonableness of chris-
" tianity," this other proposition :

V. " That the very manner of every thing in chris-
" tianity, must be clear and intelligible ; every
" thing must immediately be comprehended by
" the weakest noddle ; or else it is no part of re-
" ligion, especially of Christianity."

These things he must prove that I have said ; I put
it again upon him to show where I said them, or else
to confess the forgery : for till he does one or the other,
he shall be sure to have these, with a large catalogue of
other falsehoods, laid before him.

Page 26, of his " Socinianism unmasked," he endea
vours to make good his saying, that " I set up one arti-
" cle, with defiance to all the rest," in these words : " for
" what is excluding them wholly,, but defying them ?
" Wherefore, seeing he utterly excludes all the rest, by
" representing them as USELESS to the making a man a
" Christian, which is the design of his whole under-
" taking, it is manifest that he defies them."

Answ. This at least is manifest from hence, that
the unmasker knows not, or cares not what he says.
For whoever, but he, thought, that a bare exclusion, or
passing by was defiance ? If he understands so, I would
advise him not to seek preferment. For exclusions will

206 A Second Vindication of the

happen ; and if every exclusion be defiance, a man had
need be well assured of his own good temper, who shall
not think his peace and charity in danger, amongst so
many enemies that are at defiance with him. Defiance,
if, with any propriety, it can be spoken of an article of
faith, must signify a professed enmity to it. For, in its
proper use, which is to persons, it signifies an open and
declared enmity, raised to that height, that he, in whom
it is, challenges the party defied to battle, that he may
there wreak his hatred on his enemy, in his destruction.
So that " my defiance of all the rest " remains still to be
proved.

But, secondly, There is another thing manifest from
these words of his, viz. that, notwithstanding his great
brags in his first paragraph, his main skill lies in fancy
ing what would be for his turn, and then confidently fa
thering it upon me. It never entered into my thoughts,
nor, I think, into any body's else, (I must always except
the acute unmasker, who makes no difference between
useful and necessary,) that all but the fundamental arti
cles of the Christian faith were useless to make a man a
Christian ; though, if it be true, that the belief of the
fundamentals alone (be they few, or many) is all that is
necessary to his being made a Christian, all that may
any way persuade him to believe them, may certainly
be useful towards the making him a Christian : and
therefore here again, I must propose to him, and leave
it with him to be showed where it is.

VI. " I have represented all the rest as useless to the
" making a man a Christian?" And how it ap
pears, that " this is the design of my whole under-
" taking?"

In his " Thoughts concerning the causes of atheism,"
he says, page 115, " What makes him contend for one
" single article, with the exclusion of all the rest ? He
" pretends it is this, that all men ought to understand
" their religion." This reasoning I disowned, p. 174,
of my Vindication, and intimated, that he should have
quoted the page where I so pretended.

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 207

To this, p. 26, he tells me with great confidence,
and in abundance of words, as we shall see by and by,
that 1 had done so ; as if repetition were a proof. He
had done better to have quoted one place, where I so
pretend. Indeed, p. 27, for want of something better,
he quotes these words of mine out of p. 157, of the
Reasonableness of Christianity : " The all-merciful God
" seems herein to have consulted the poor of this
" world, and the bulk of mankind. THESE AIIE ARTI-
" CLES that the labouring and illiterate man may com-
" prehend." I ask, whether it be possible for one to
bring any thing more direct against himself? The thing
he was to prove was, that " I contended for one single
" article, with the exclusion of all the rest, because I
" pretended, that all men ought to understand their
" religion :" i. e. the reason I gave, why there was to
be " but one single article in religion, with the exclu-
" sion of all the rest," was, because men ought to un
derstand their religion. And the place he brings, to
prove my contending upon that ground, " for one single
" article, with the exclusion of all the rest," is a passage
wherein I speak of more than one article, and say, " these
" articles." Whether I said, " these articles," properly
or improperly, it matters not, in the present case (and
that we have examined in another place) it is plain,
I meant more than one article, when I said, " these ar-
" tides;" and did not think, that the labouring and
illiterate man could not understand them, if they were
more than one : and therefore, I pretended not, that
there must be but one, because by illiterate men more
than one could not be understood. The rest of this pa
ragraph is nothing but a repetition of the same asser
tion, without proof, which, with the unmasker, often
passes for a way of proving, but with nobody else.

But, that I may keep that distance, which he boasts,
there is betwixt his and my way of writing, I shall not
say this without proof. One instance of his repetition,
of which there is such plenty in his book, pray take
here. His business, p. 26, is to prove, that " I pre-
** tended that I contended for one single article, with
" the exclusion of all the rest^ because all men ought to

208 A Second Vindication of the

" understand their religion:" p. 174, of my -Vindica
tion, I denied that I had so pretended. To convince me
that I had, thus he proceeds :

Unmasker. " He founds his conceit " of one article,
" partly upon this, that a multitude of doctrines is ob-
" scure, and hard to be understood."

Answer. You say it, and had said it before : but I
ask you, as I did before. Where I did so ?

Umn. " And therefore he trusses all up in one article,
" that the poor people and bulk of mankind may
" bear it."

Answ. I desire again to know where I made that in
ference, and argued so, for " one article?"

Unm. " This is the scope of a great part of his
« book."

Answ. This is saying again, show it once.
Unm. " But his memory does not keep pace with his
" invention, and thence he says, he remembers nothing
" of this in his book," Vind. p. 174.

Answ. This is to say that it is in my book. You have
said it more than once- already ; I demand of you to
show me where.

Unm. " This worthy writer does not know his own
" reasoning, that he uses."

Answ. I ask, Where does he use that reasoning ?
Unm. " As particularly thus, that he troubles chris-
" tian men with no more, but one article : BECAUSE
" that is intelligible, and all people, high and low, may
" comprehend it."

Answ. We have heard it affirmed by you, over and
over again, but the question still is, " Where is that way
" of arguing to be found in my book ?"

Unm. " For he has chosen out, as he thinks, a plain
" and easy article. Whereas the others, which are com-
" monly propounded, are not generally agreed on, (he
" saith,) and are dubious and uncertain. But the be-
" lieving that Jesus is the Messiah, has nothing of
" doubtfulness or obscurity in it."

Answ. The word " For," in the beginning of this
sentence, makes it stand for one of your reasons ; though
it be but a repetition of the same thing in other words.

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 209

Unm. " This the reader will find to be the drift and
" design of several of his pages."

Answ. This must signify " that I trouble men with no
" more but one article, because only one is intelligible,"
and then it is but a repetition. If any thing else be
meant by the word This, it is nothing to the purpose.
For that I said, that all things necessary to be be
lieved are plain in scripture, and easy to be understood,
I never denied ; and should be very sorry, and recant
it, if I had.

Unm. " And the reason why I did not quote any sin-
" gle one of them, was, because he insists on it, so long
" together : and spins it out after his way, in p. 156 of
" his " Reasonableness of Christianity," where he sets
" down the short, plain, easy, and intelligible summary
" (as he calls it) of religion," couched in a single ar
ticle : he immediately adds : " the all-merciful God
" seems herein to have consulted the poor of this world,
" and the bulk of mankind : these are articles" (whereas
he had set down but one) " that the labouring and il-
" literate man may comprehend."

Answ. If " my insisting on it so long together" was
" the cause why, in your thoughts of the causes of
" atheism," you did not quote any single passage ; me-
thinks here, in your " Socinianism unmasked," where
you knew it was expected of you, my " insisting on it,"
as you say, " so long together," might have afforded,
at least, one quotation to your purpose.

Unm. "He assigns this, as a ground, why it was
" God's pleasure, that there should be but ONE POINT
" of faith, BECAUSE thereby religion may be under-
" stood the better ; the generality of people may com-
" prehend it."

Answ. I hear you say it again, but want a proof still,
and ask, " where I assign that ground ?"

Unm. " This he represents as a great kindness done
" by God to man ; whereas the variety of articles would
" be hard to be understood."

Answ. Again the same cabbage ; an affirmation, but
no proof.

P

210 A Second Vindication of the

Unm. "This he enlarges upon, and flourishes it
" over, after his fashion : and yet desires to know,
" When he said so?" p. 175 Vind.

Answ. And if I did, let the world here take a sample
of the un masker's ability, or truth, who spends above
two whole pages, 26, 27, in repetitions of the same as
sertion, without the producing any but one place for
proof; and that too against him, as I have shown. But
he has not yet done with confounding me by dint of re
petition ; he goes on.

Unm. " Good sir, let me be permitted to acquaint you,
" that your memory is as defective as your judgment."

Answ. I thank you for the regard you have had to it ;
for often repetition is a good help to a bad memory.
In requital, I advise you to have some eye to your own
memory and judgment too. For one, or both of them,
seem a little to blame, in the reason you subjoin to the
foregoing words, viz.

Unm. "For in the very Vindication, you attribute it
" to the goodness and condescension of the Almighty,
" that he requires nothing, as absolutely necessary to be
" believed, but what is suited to vulgar capacities, and
" the comprehension of illiterate men."

Answ. I will, for the un masker's sake, put this argu
ment of his into a syllogism. If the vindicator, in his
vindication, attributes it to the goodness and condes
cension of the Almighty, that he requires nothing to be
believed, but what is suited to vulgar capacities, and the
comprehension of illiterate men ; then he did, in his
" Reasonableness of Christianity," pretend, that the
reason, why he contended for One article, with the ex
clusion of all the rest, was because all men ought to
understand their religion.

But the vindicator, in his vindication, attributes it
to the goodness and condescension of Almighty God,
that he requires nothing to be believed, but what is
suited to vulgar capacities, and the comprehension of
illiterate men.

" Ergo," in his u Reasonableness of Christianity,"
lie pretended, that the reason why he contended for one

Reasonableness of Christianity, $$c. 211

article, with the exclusion of all the rest, was, because
all men ought to understand their religion.

This was the proposition to be proved, and which, as
he confesses here, p. 26, I denied to remember to be in
my " Reasonableness of Christianity." Who can but
admire his logic !

But, besides the strength of judgment, which you have
showed in this clear and cogent reasoning, Does not
your memory too deserve its due applause? You tell
me, in your " Socinianism unmasked," that in p. 175
of my Vindication, 1 desired to know when I said so.
To which desire of mine, you reply in these words be
fore cited : " Good sir, let me be permitted to acquaint
" you, that your memory is as defective as your judg-
" inent ; for, in the very Vindication, you attribute it
" to the goodness and condescension of the Almighty,
" that he requires nothing, as absolutely necessary to be
" believed, but what is suited to vulgar capacities, and
" the comprehension of illiterate men," p. 30.

Sure the urimasker thinks himself at cross questions.
I ask him, in the 29th page of my Vindication, WHEN
I said so ? And he answers, that I had said so in the 30th
page of my Vindication ; i. e. when I writ the 29th
page, I asked the question, When I had said, what he
charged me with saying? And I am answered, I had
said in the 30th page ; which was not yet written : i. e.
I asked the question to-day, WHEN I had said so ? And
I am answered, I had said it to-morrow. As opposite
and convincing an answer, to make good his charge, as
if he had said, To-morrow I found a horse-shoe. But,
perhaps this judicious disputant will ease himself of this
difficulty, by looking again into the 175th page of my
Vindication, out of which he cites these words for mine :
" I desire to know, When I said so?" But my words
in that place are, " I desire to know, WHERE I said so ?"
A mark of his exactness in quoting, when he vouchsafes
to do it. For unmaskers, when they turn disputants,
think it the best way to talk at large, and charge home
in generals : but do not often find it convenient to quote
pages, set down words, and come to particulars. But,

p 2

212 A Second Vindication of the

if he had quoted my words right, his answer had been
just as pertinent. For I ask him, WHERE, in my
" Reasonableness of Christianity," I had said so ? And
he answers, I had said so in my Vindication. For where,
in my question, refers to my " Reasonableness of chris-
" tianity," which the un masker had seen, and charged
with this saying ; and could not refer to my Vindication,
which he had not yet seen, nor to a passage in it, whicli
was not then written. But this is nothing with an un-
masker; therefore, what is yet worse, those words of
mine, Vindication, p. 1 75, relate not to the passage he
is here proving, I had said, but to another different from
it ; as different as it is to say, " That, because all men
" are to understand their religion, therefore there is to
" be but one article in it ;" and to say, " that there
" must be nothing in Christianity that is not plain, and
" exactly levelled to all men's mother- wit :" both which
he falsely charges on me ; but it is only to the latter of
them, that my words, " I desire to know, where I said
" so ?" are applied.

Perhaps the well-meaning man sees no difference be
tween these propositions, yet I shall take the liberty to
ask him again, Where I said either of them, as if they
were two? Although he should accuse me again, of
" excepting against the formality of words," and doing
so foolish a thing, as to expect, that a disputing un-
masker should account for his words, or any proposition
he advances. It is his privilege to plead, he did not
mean as his words import, and without any more ado
he is assoiled ; and he is the same unmasker he was be
fore. But let us hear him out on the argument he was
upon, for his repetitions on it are not yet done. His
next words are,

Unm. " It is clear then, that you found your ONE
*' article on this, that it is suited to the vulgar capa-
" cities : whereas the other articles mentioned by me,
" are obscure and ambiguous, and therefore surpass the
" comprehension of the illiterate."

Arisw. The latter part, indeed, is now the first time
imputed to me ; but all the rest is nothing but an un-

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 213

proved repetition, though ushered in with " it is clear
" then ;" words that should have a proof going before
them.

Unm. " But yet you pretend, that you have forgot
" that any such thing was said by you."

Answ. I have indeed forgot, and notwithstanding all
your pains, by so many repetitions, to beat it into my
head, I fear I shall never remember it.

Unm. " Which shows that you are careless of your
" words, and that you forget what you write."

Answ. So you told me before, and this repeating of
it does no more convince me than that did.

Unm. " What shall we say to such an oblivious au-
" thor?"

Answ. Show it him in his book, or else he will never
be able to remember that it is there, nor any body else
be able to find it.

Unm. " He takes no notice of what falls from his
" own pen."

Answ. So you have told him more than once. Try
him once with showing it him, amongst other things
which fell from his own pen, and see what then he will
say : that perhaps may refresh his memory.

Unm. " And therefore, within a page or two, he
" confutes himself, and gives himself the lye."

Answ. It is a fault he deserves to be told of, over
and over again. But he says, he shall not be able to
find the two pages wherein he " gives himself the lye,"
unless you set down their numbers, and the words in
them, which confute, and which are confuted.

I beg my reader's pardon, for laying before him so
large a pattern of our unmasker's new-fashioned stuff;
his fine tissue of argumentation not easily to be match
ed, but by the same hand. But it lay all together in
p. 26, 27, 28 ; and it was fit the reader should have
this one instance of the excellencies he promises in his
first paragraph, in opposition to my " impertiriencies,
" incoherences, weak and feeble strugglings." Other
excellencies he there promised, upon the same ground,
which I shall give my reader a taste of in fit places :
not but that the whole is of a piece, and one cannot miss

A Second Vindication of the

some of them in every page ; but to transcribe them all,
would be more than they are worth. If any one desires
more plenty, I send him to his book itself. But saying
a thousand times, not being proved once, it remains
upon him still to show,

VII. Where, in my " Reasonableness of Christianity,"
" I pretend that I contend for one single article,
" with the exclusion of all the rest, because all
" men ought to understand their religion."

And in the next place, where it is that I say,

VIII. " That there must be nothing in Christianity
" that is not plain and exactly level to all men's
" mother-wit."

Let us now return to his 8th page : for the bundling
together, as was fit, all that he has said, in distant places,
upon the subject of One article, has made me trespass a
little, against the Jewish character of a well bred man,
recommended by him to me, out of the Mishna. Though
I propose to myself to follow him, as near as I can, step
by step as he proceeds.

In the 110th and lllth pages of his " Thoughts con-
" cerning the causes of atheism," he gave us a list of
his "fundamental articles:" upon which, I thus ap
plied myself to him, Vind. p. 168, &c. " Give me leave
" now to ask you seriously, Whether these you have
" here set down under the title of " fundamental doc-
" trines," are such (when reduced to propositions) that
" every one of them is required to make a man a chris-
" tian, and such as, without the actual belief thereof,
" he cannot be saved ? If they are not so, every one of
" them, you may call them " fundamental doctrines,"
" as much as you please, they are not of those doctrines
" of faith I was speaking of; which are only such as
" are required to be actually believed, to make a man
" a Christian." And again, Vind. p. 169, 1 asked him,
" Whether just these, neither more nor less," were those
necessary articles ?

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 215

To which we have his answer, " Socinianism un-
" masked," p. 8, &c. From p. 8 to 20, he has quoted
near forty texts of scripture, of which he saith, p. 21,
" Thus I have briefly set before the reader, those evan-
" gelical truths, those Christian principles, which belong
" to the very essence of Christianity : I have proved
" them to be such, and I have reduced most of them
" to certain propositions, which is a thing the vindi-
" cator called for."

Answ. Yes : but that was not all the vindicator call
ed for, and had reason to expect. For I asked, " Whe-
u ther those the unmasker gave us, in his Thoughts
" concerning the causes of atheism," were the funda
mental articles, " without an actual belief whereof, a
" man could not be a Christian ; just all, neither more
" nor less ?" This I had reason to demand from him,
or from any one, who questions that part of my book;
and I shall insist upon it, until he does it, or confesses
he cannot. For having set down the articles, which the
scripture, upon a diligent search, seemed to me to re
quire as necessary, and only necessary ; I shall riot lose
my time in examining what another says against those
fundamentals, which I have gathered out of the preach
ings of our Saviour and his apostles, until he gives me
a list of his fundamentals, which he will abide by ; that
so, by comparing them together, I may see which is the
true catalogue of necessaries. For after so serious and
diligent a search, which has given me light and satisfac
tion in this great point, I shall not quit it, and set my
self on float again, at the demand of any one, who would
have me be of his faith, without telling me what it is.
Those fundamentals the scripture has so plainly given,
and so evidently determined, that it would be the
greatest folly imaginable, to part with this rule for ask
ing ; and give up myself blindly to the conduct of one,
who either knows not, or will not tell me, what are the
points necessary to be believed to make me a Christian.
He that shall find fault with my collection of funda
mentals, only to unsettle me, and not give me a better
of his own, I shall not think worth minding, until, like
a fair man, he puts himself upon equal terms, and makes

A Second Vindication of the

up the defects of mine, by a complete one of his own.
For a deficiency, or errour, in one necessary, is as fatal,
and as certainly excludes a man from being a Christian,
as in an hundred. When any one offers me a complete
catalogue of his fundamentals, he does not unreasonably
demand me to quit mine for nothing : I have then one,
that being set by mine, I may compare them ; and so
be able to choose the true and perfect one, and relinquish
the other.

He that does not do this, plainly declares, that,
(without showing me the certain way to salvation) he
expects, that I should depend on him with an implicit
faith, whilst he reserves to himself the liberty to require
of me to believe, what he shall think fit, as he sees occa
sion ; and in effect says thus, " Distrust those funda-
" mentals, which the preachings of Our Saviour and his
" apostles have showed to be all that is necessary to be
" believed to make a man a Christian ; and, though I
" cannot tell you, what are those other articles which
" are necessary and sufficient to make a man a Christian,
" yet take me for your guide, and that is as good as if
" I made up, in a complete list, the defects of your fun-
" damentals ?" To which this is a sufficient answer,
" Si quid novisti rectius, imperti ; si non, his titere
" mecum."

The unmasker, of his own accord, p. 110 of his
" Thoughts concerning the causes of atheism," sets
down several, which he calls " fundamental doctrines."
I ask him, whether those be all ? For answer, he adds
more to them in his " Socinianism unmasked :" but in
a great pet refuses to tell me, whether this second list of
fundamentals be complete : and, instead of answering
so reasonable a demand, pays me with ill language, in
these words, p. 22, subjoined to those last quoted, " If
" what I have said will not content him, I am sure I
" can do nothing that will ; and therefore, if he should
" capriciously require any thing more, it would be as
" great folly in me to comply with it, as it is in him to
" move it." If I did ask a question, which troubles you,
be not so angry ; you yourself were the occasion of it.
I proposed my collection of fundamentals, which I had,

Reasonableness of Christianity* 8$c. 21 7

with great care, sought ; and thought I had found clear
in the scripture ; you tell me no, it is imperfect, and
offer me one of your own. I ask, whether that be per
fect ? Thereupon you grow into choler, and tell me it
is a foolish question. Why ! then I think it was not
very wise in you so forwardly to offer one, unless you
had one ready, not liable to the same exception. Would
you have me so foolish, to take a list of fundamentals
from you, who have not yet one for yourself; nor are
yet resolved with yourself, wrhat doctrines are to be put
in, or left out of it ? Farther, pray tell me, if you had
a settled collection of fundamentals, that you would
stand to, why should I take them from you, upon your
word, rather than from an anabaptist, or a quaker, or
an arminian, or a socinian, or a lutheran, or a papist;
who, I think, are not perfectly agreed with you, or
one another in fundamentals ? And yet, there is none
amongst them, that I have not as much reason to be
lieve, upon his bare word, as an unmasker, who, to my
certain knowledge, will make bold with truth. If you
set up for infallibility, you may have some claim to have
your bare word taken, before any other but the pope.
But yet, if you demand to be an unquestionable pro
poser, of what is absolutely necessary to be believed to
make a man a Christian, you must perform it a little
better, than hitherto you have done. For it is not
enough, sometimes to give us texts of scripture ; some
times propositions of your own framing, and sometimes
texts of scripture, out of which they are to be framed ;
as p. 14, you say, " These and the like places afford us
" such fundamental and necessary doctrines as these :"
and again,, p. 16, after the naming several other texts of
scripture, you add, " which places yield us such pro-
" positions as these ;" and then in both places set down
what you think fit to draw out of them. And p. 15,
you have these words : " and here, likewise, it were easy
" to show, that adoption, justification, pardon of sins,
" &c. which are privileges and benefits bestowed upon
" us by the Messiah, are necessary matters of our be-
" lief." By all which, as well as the whole frame, where
in you make show of giving us your fundamental arti-

218 A Second Vindication of the

cles, it is plain, that what you have given us there, is
nothing less than a complete collection of fundamentals,
even in your own opinion of it.

But, good sir, Why is it a foolish question in me ?
You have found fault with my summary for being short ;
the defect in my collection of necessary articles, has
raised your zeal into so severe censures, and drawn upon
me, from you, so heavy a condemnation, that, if half you
have said of me be true, I am in a very ill case, for hav
ing so curtailed the fundamental doctrines of Christia
nity. Is it folly, then, for me to ask from you a com
plete creed ? If it be so dangerous (as certainly it is) to
fail in any necessary article of faith, Why is it folly in
me, to be instant with you, to give me them all ? Or
why is it folly in you, to grant so reasonable a demand?
A short faith, defective in necessaries, is no more tole
rable in you, than in me ; nay, much more inexcusable,
if it were for no other reason but this, that you rest in it
yourself, and would impose it on others ; and yet do not
yourself know,, or believe it to be complete. For if you
do, why dare you not say so, and give it us all entire, in
plain propositions ; and not, as you have in a great
measure done here, give only the texts of scripture,
from whence, you say, necessary articles are to be
drawn ? Which is too great an uncertainty for doctrines
absolutely necessary. For, possibly, all men do not un
derstand those texts alike, and some may draw articles
out of them quite different from your system ; and so,
though they agree in the same texts, may not agree in
the same fundamentals; and till you have set down
plainly and distinctly your articles, that you think con
tained in them, cannot tell whether you will allow them
to be Christians, or no. For you know, sir, several infer
ences are often drawn from the same text : and the dif
ferent systems of dissenting (I was going to say chris-
tians, but that none must be so, but those who receive
your collection of fundamentals, when you please to give
it them) professors are all founded on the scripture,

Why, I beseech you, is mine a foolish question to ask,
" What are the necessary articles of faith ?" It is of no
less consequence than, nor much different from the

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c.

jailer's question in the sixteenth of the Acts, " What shall
" I do to be saved ?" And that was not, that ever I
heard, counted by any one a foolish question. You
grant, there are articles necessary to be belived for sal
vation : Would it not then be wisdom to know them ?
Nay, is it not our duty to know arid believe them ? If
not, why do you, with so much outcry, reprehend me,
for not knowing them ? Why do you fill your books with
such variety of invectives, as if you could never say
enough, nor bad enough against me, for having left out
some of them? And, if it be so dangerous, so criminal
to miss any of them. Why is it a folly in me, to move
you to give me a complete list ?

If fundamentals are to be known, easy to be known,
(as without doubt, they are,) then a catalogue may be
given of them. But, if they are not, if it cannot cer
tainly be determined, which are they ; but the doubtful
knowledge of them depends upon guesses ; Why may
not I be permitted to follow my guesses, as well as you
yours ? Or why, of all others, must you prescribe your
guesses to me, when there are so many that are as ready
to prescribe as you, and of as good authority ? The pre
tence, indeed, and clamour is religion, and the saving
of souls : but your business, it is plain, is nothing but
to over-rule and prescribe, and be hearkened to as a
dictator : and not to inform, teach, and instruct in the
sure way to salvation. Why else do you so start and
fling, when I desire to know of you, what is necessary
to be believed to make a man a Christian, when this is
the only material thing in controversy between us ; and
my mistake in it has made you begin a quarrel with me,
and let loose your pen against me in no ordinary way of
reprehension ?

Besides, in this way which you take, you will be in
no better a case than I. For, another having as good a
claim to have his guesses give the rule, as you yours ;
or to have his system received, as well as you yours ;
he will complain of you as well; and upon as good
grounds, as you do of me ; and (if he have but as much
zeal for his orthodoxy, as you show for yours) in as
civil, well-bred, and christian-like language.

A Second Vindication of the

In the next place, pray tell me, Why would it be folly
in you, to comply with what I require of you ? Would
it not be useful to me, to be set right in this matter ? If
so, Why is it folly in you to set me right ? Consider me,
if you please, as one of your parishioners, who (after you
have resolved which catalogue of fundamentals to give
him, either that in your " Thoughts of the Causes of
" Atheism/' or this other here, in your " Socinianism
" unmasked ;" for they are not both the same, nor either
of them perfect) asked you, " Are these all fundamental
" articles necessary to be believed to make a man a
" Christian ; and are there no more but these ?" Would
you answer him, that it was folly in you to comply
with him, in what he desired? Is it of no moment
to know, what is required of men to be believed ; with
out a belief of which, they are not Christians, nor can be
saved ? And is it folly in a minister of the gospel, to in
form one committed to his instruction, in so material a
point as this, which distinguishes believers from unbe
lievers ? Is it folly in one, whose business it is to bring
men to be Christians, and to salvation, to resolve a ques
tion, by which they may know, whether they are chris-
tians or no ; and, without a resolution of which, they
cannot certainly know their condition, and the state
they are in ? Is it besides your commission and business,
and therefore a folly, to extend your care of souls so far
as this, to those who are committed to your charge ?

Sir, I have a title to demand this of you, as if I were
your parishioner : you have forced yourself upon me for
a teacher, in this very point, as if you wanted a pa
rishioner to instruct : and therefore I demand it of
you, and shall insist upon it, till you either do it, or
confess you cannot. Nor shall it excuse you, to say it
is capriciously required. For this is no otherwise ca
pricious, than all questions are capricious to a man,
that cannot answer them ; and such an one, I think,
this is to you. For, if you could answer it, nobody
can doubt, but that you would, and that with confi
dence : for nobody will suspect it is the want of that
makes you so reserved. This is, indeed, a frequent way
of answering questions, by men, that cannot otherwise

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 221

cover the absurdities of their opinions, and their inso
lence of expecting to be believed upon their bare words,
by saying they are capriciously asked, and deserve no
other answer.

But how far soever capriciousness (when proved, for
saying is not enough) may excuse from answering a ma
terial question, yet your own words here will clear this
from this being a capricious question in me. For that
those texts of scripture which you have set down, do not,
upon your own grounds, contain all the fundamental
doctrines of religion, all that is necessary to be believed
to make a man a Christian ; what you say a little lower,
in this very page, as well as in other places, does demon
strate. Your words are, " I think I have sufficiently
" proved, that there are other doctrines besides that
" [Jesus is the Messiah] which are required to be believ-
" ed to make a man a Christian ; Why did the apostles
" write these doctrines? Was it not, that those they writ
" to, might give their assent to them ?" This argument,
for the necessity of believing the texts you cite from
their being set down in the " New Testament," you
urged thus, p. 9, " Is this set down to no purpose in these
" inspired epistles ? Is it not requisite that we should
" know it and believe ?" And again, p. 29> " they are in
" our bibles to that very purpose, to be believed." If
then it be necessary to know and believe those texts of
scripture you have collected, because the apostles writ
them, and they were not " set down to no purpose : and
" they are set down in our bibles on purpose to be be-
" lieved:" I have reason to demand of you other texts,
besides those you have enumerated, as containing points
necessary to be believed ; because there are other texts
which the apostles writ, and were not " set down to no
" purpose, and are in our bibles, on purpose to be be-
" lieved," as well as those which you have cited.

Another reason of doubting, and consequently of de
manding, whether those propositions you have set down
for fundamental doctrines, be every one of them necessary
to be believed, and all that are necessary to be believed
to make a man a Christian, I have from your next argu
ment ; which, joined to the former, stands thus, p. 22 :

A Second Vindication of the

" Why did the apostles write these doctrines ? Was it
" not that those they writ to, might give their assent to
" them ? Nay, did they not require assent to them ?
" Yes verily ; for this is to be proved from the nature
" of the things contained in these doctrines, which are
" such as had immediate respect to the occasion, au-
t( thor, way, means and issue, of their redemption and
" salvation." If therefore all " things which have an
" immediate respect to the occasion, author, way,
" means and issue of men's redemption and salvation,"
are those and those only, which are necessary to be be
lieved to make a man a Christian ; may a man not justly
doubt, whether those propositions, which the unmasker
has set down, contain all those things, and whether there
be not other things contained in other texts of scripture,
or in some of those cited by him, but otherwise under
stood, that have as immediate a " respect to the occa-
" sion, author, way, means arid issue, of men's redemp-
" tion and salvation," as those he has set down ? and
therefore I have reason to demand a completer list.
For at best, to tell us of " all things that have an im-
" mediate respect to the occasion, author, way, means
" and issue, of men's redemption and salvation," is but
a general description of fundamentals, with which some
may think some articles agree, and others, others : and
the terms, " immediate respect," may give ground
enough for difference about them, to those who agree
that the rest of your description is right. My demand
therefore is not a general description of fundamentals,
but, for the reasons above mentioned, the particular ar
ticles themselves, which are necessary to be believed to
make a man a Christian.

It is not my business at present, to examine the va
lidity of these arguments of his, to prove all the proposi
tions to be necessary to be believed, which he has here,
in his " Socinianism unmasked," set down as such.
The use I make of them now, is to show the reason they
afford me to doubt, that those propositions, which he
has given us, for doctrines necessary to be believed, are
either not all such, or more than all, by his own rule :
and therefore, I must desire him to give us a completer

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 223

creed, that we may know, what in his sense, is neces
sary, and enough to make a man a Christian.

Nor will it be sufficient, in this case, to do what he
tells us he has done, in these words, p. 21, "I have
" briefly set before the reader those evangelical truths,
" those Christian principles, which belong to the very

" essence of Christianity ;" and " I have reduced

" most of them to certain propositions, which is a thing
" the vindicator called for," p. 16. With submission,
I think he mistakes the vindicator. What I called for,
was, not that, " most of them should be reduced to cer-
" tain propositions," but that all of them should : and
the reason of my demanding that was plain, viz. that
then, having the unmasker's creed in clear and distinct
propositions, I might be able to examine whether it was
what God in the scriptures indispensably required of
every man to make him a Christian, that so I might
thereby correct the errours or defects of what I at pre
sent apprehend the scripture taught me in the case.

The unmasker endeavours to excuse himself from
answering my question by another exception against it,
p. 24, in these words : " Surely none, but this upstart
" racovian, will have the confidence to deny, that these
" articles of faith are such as are necessary to constitute
" a Christian, as to the intellectual and doctrinal part of
" Christianity ; such as must, IN SOME MEASURE, be
" known and assented to by him. Not that a man is
" supposed, every moment, actually to exert his assent
" and belief; for none of the moral virtues, none of the
" evangelical graces, are exerted thus always. Where-
" fore that question," in p. 168, " though he says he
" asks it" (seriously) " might have been spared," " Whe-
(( ther every one of these fundamentals is required to
66 be believed to make a man a Christian, and such as,
" without the actual belief thereof, he cannot be saved ?"
" Here is seriousness pretended where there is none ;
" for the design is only to cavil, and (if he can) to ex-
«' pose my assertion. But he is not able to do it ; for
»' all his critical demands are answered in these few
/ words, viz. That the intellectual (as well as moral
4 endowments) are never supposed to be always in act :

A Second Vindication of the

" they are exerted upon occasion, not all of them at a
" time. And therefore he mistakes, if he thinks, or
" rather as he objects without thinking, that these doc-
" trines, if they be fundamental and necessary, must be
" always actually believed. No man, besides himself,
" ever started such a thing."

This terrible long combat has the unmasker managed
with his own shadow, to confound the seriousness of my
question ; and, as he says himself, is come off, not only
safe and sound, but triumphant. But for all that, sir,
may not a man's question be serious, though he should
chance to express it ill ? I think you and I were not best
to set up for critics in language, and nicety of expres
sion, for fear we should set the world a laughing. Yet
for this once, I shall take the liberty to defend mine
here. For I demand in what expression of mine, I said
or supposed, that a man should, every moment, actually
exert his assent to any proposition required to be be
lieved ? Cannot a man say, that the unmasker cannot
be admitted to any preferment in the church of Eng
land, without an actual assent to, or subscribing of the
thirty-nine articles ; unless it be supposed, that he must
every moment, from the time he first read, assented to,
and subscribed those articles, until he received institu
tion and induction, " actually exert his assent" to every
one of them, and repeat his subscription? In the same
sense it is literally true, that a man cannot be admitted
into the church of Christ, or into heaven, without actu
ally believing all the articles necessary to make a man
a Christian, without supposing that he must cc actually
" exert that assent every moment," from the time that
he first gave it, until the moment that he is admitted
into heaven. He may eat, drink, make bargains, study
Euclid, and think of other things between ; nay, some
times sleep, and neither think of those articles, nor any
thing else ; and yet it be true, that he shall not be ad
mitted into the church, or heaven, without an actual
assent to them : that condition of an actual assent, he
has performed, and until he recall that assent, by actual
unbelief, it stands good : and though a lunacy, or le
thargy, should seize on him presently after, and he

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc.

should never think of it again as long as he lived, yet it
is literally true, he is not saved without an actual assent.
You might therefore have spared your pains, in saying,
" that none of the moral virtues, none of the evangelical
" graces, are exerted THUS always," until you had met
with somebody who said THUS. That I did so, I think,
would have entered into no body's thoughts but yours,
it being evident from p. 156, of my book, that by actual,
I meant explicit. You should rather have given a di
rect answer to my question, which I here again seriously
ask you, viz. Whether

IX. Those you called " fundamental doctrines/' in
your " Thoughts concerning the causes of athe-
" ism," or those Christian principles, which be-
" long to the very essence of Christianity/' so
many as you have given us of them in your " So-
" cinianism unmasked," (for you may take which
of your two creeds you please,) are just those, nei
ther more or less, that are every one of them re
quired to be believed to make a man a Christian,
and such as, without the actual, or (since that word
displeases you) the explicit belief whereof, he can
not be saved ?

When you have answered this question, we shall then
see which of us two is nearest the right: but if you shall
forbear railing, which, I fear, you take for arguing,
against that summary of faith, which our Saviour and
his apostles taught, and which only they proposed to
their hearers to be believed, to make them Christians^
until you have found another perfect creed, of only ne
cessary articles, that you dare own for such ; you are like
to have a large time of silence. Before I leave the pas
sage above cited, I must desire the reader to take no
tice of what he says, concerning his list of fundamentals,
viz. That " these his articles of faith," necessary to con
stitute a Christian, are such as must, IN SOME MEASURE,
be known and assented to by him : a very wary expres
sion concerning fundamentals ! The question is about
articles necessary to be explicitly believed to make a

226 A Second Vindication of the

man a Christian. These, in his list, the unmasker tells
us, are " necessary to constitute a Christian, and must,
" IN SOME MEASURE, be known and assented to." I
would now fain know of the reader, Whether he under
stands thereby, that the masker means, that these his
necessary articles must be explicitly believed or not?
If he means an explicit knowledge and belief, why does
he puzzle his reader, by so improper a way of speaking?
For what is as complete and perfect as it ought to be,
cannot properly be said to be " in some measure." If
his, " in some measure/' falls short of explicitly know
ing and believing his fundamentals, his necessary ar
ticles are such as a man may be a Christian, without ex
plicitly knowing and believing, i. e. are no fundamen
tals, no necessary articles at all. Thus men, uncertain
what to say, betray themselves by their great caution.

Having pronounced it folly in himself to make up
the defects of my short, and therefore so much blamed
collection of fundamentals, by a full one of his own,
though his attempt shows he would if he could ; he goes
on thus, p. 22, " From what I [the unmasker] have
" said, it is evident, that the vindicator is grossly mis-
" taken, when he saith, * Whatever doctrines the
" apostles required to be believed to make a man a
" Christian, are to be found in those places of scripture
" which he has quoted in his book.' " And a little
lower, " I think I have sufficiently proved, that there
" are other doctrines besides that, which are required
" to be believed to make a man a Christian."

Answ. Whatever you have proved, or (as you never
fail to do) boast you have proved, will signify nothing,
until you have proved one of these propositions ; and
have shown either,

X. That what our Saviour and his apostles preached,
and admitted men into the church for believing, is
not all that is absolutely required to make a man a
Christian. Or,

That the believing him to be the Messiah, was not the
only article they insisted on, to those who acknow
ledged one God ; and, upon the belief whereof

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc.

they admitted converts into the church, in any one
of those many places quoted by me out of the his
tory of the New Testament.

I say, any one : for though it be evident, throughout
the whole gospel, and the Acts, that this was the one
doctrine of faith, which, in all their preachings every
where, they principally drive at : yet, if it were not so,
but that in other places they taught other things, that
would not prove that those other things were articles of
faith, absolutely necessarily required to be believed to
make a man a Christian, unless it had been so said. Be
cause, if it appears that ever any one was admitted into
the church, by our Saviour or his apostles, without
having that article explicitly laid before him, and with
out his explicit assent to it, you must grant, that an ex
plicit assent to that article is not necessary to make a
man a Christian : unless you will say, that our Saviour
and his apostles admitted men into the church that were
not qualified with such a faith as was absolutely neces
sary to make a man a Christian ; which is as much as to
say, that they allowed and pronounced men to be chris-
tians, who were not Christians. For he that wants
what is necessary to make a man a Christian, can no
more be a Christian, than he that wants what is neces
sary to make him a man, can be a man. For what is
necessary to the being of any thing, is essential to its
being ; and any thing may be as well without its es
sence, as without any thing that is necessary to its be
ing : and so a man be a man, without being a man ;
and a Christian a Christian, without being a Christian ;
and an unmasker may prove this, without proving it.
You may, therefore, set up, by your unquestionable au
thority, what articles you please, as necessary to be be
lieved to make a man a Christian : if our Saviour and
his apostles admitted converts into the church, without
preaching those your articles to them, or requiring an
explicit assent to what they did not preach and expli
citly lay down, I shall prefer their authority to yours,
and think it was rather by them, than by you, that
God promulgated the law of faith, and manifested what

Q 3

A Second Vindication of the

that faith was, upon which he would receive penitent
converts.

And though, by his apostles, our Saviour taught a
great many other truths, for the explaining this funda
mental article of the law of faith, that Jesus is the Mes
siah ; some whereof have a nearer, and some a more
remote connexion with it, and so cannot be denied by
any Christian, who sees that connexion, or knows they
are so taught : yet an explicit belief of any one of them,
is no more necessarily required to make a man a Chris
tian, than an explicit belief of all those truths, which
have a connexion with the being of a God, or are re
vealed by him, is necessarily required to make a man
not to be an atheist : though none of them can be de
nied by any one who sees that connexion, or ackflow-
ledges that revelation, without his being an atheist.
All these truths, taught us from God, either by reason
or revelation, are of great use, to enlighten our minds,
confirm our faith, stir up our affections, &c. And the
more we see of them, the more we shall see, admire,
and magnify the wisdom, goodness, mercy, and love of
God, in the work of our redemption. This will oblige
us to search and study the scripture, wherein it is con
tained and laid open to us.

All that we find in the revelation of the " New Tes-
" lament," being the declared will and mind of our
Lord and Master, the Messiah, whom we have taken to
be our king, we are bound to receive as right and truth,
or else we are not his subjects, we do not believe him to
be the Messiah, our Ring, but cast him off, and with the
jews say, " We will not have this man reign over us."
But it is still wrhat we find in the scripture, not in this
or that system ; what we, sincerely seeking to know the
will of our Lord, discover to be his mind. Where it is
spoken plainly, we cannot miss it ; and it is evident he
requires our assent : where there is obscurity, either in
the expressions themselves, or by reason of the seeming
contrariety of other passages, there a fair endeavour, as
much as our circumstances will permit, secures us from
a guilty disobedience of his will, or a sinful errour in
faith, which way soever our inquiry resolves the doubt,

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 229

or perhaps leaves it unresolved. If he had required
more of us in those points, he would have declared his
will plainer to us, and discovered the truth contained
in those obscure, or seemingly contradictory places, as
clearly, and as uniformly as he did that fundamental
article, that we were to believe him to be the Messiah,
our King.

As men, we have God for our King, and are under
the law of reason : as Christians, we have Jesus the Mes
siah for our King, and are under the law revealed by
him in the gospel. And though every Christian, both
as a deist and a Christian, be obliged to study both the
law of nature and the revealed law, that in them he may
know the will of God, and of Jesus Christ, whom he
hath sent ; yet, in neither of these laws, is there to be
found a select set of fundamentals, distinct from the rest,
which are to make him a deist, or a Christian. But he
that believes one eternal, invisible God, his Lord and
King, ceases thereby to be an atheist ; and he that be
lieves Jesus to be the Messiah, his king, ordained by
God, thereby becomes a Christian, is delivered from the
power of darkness, and is translated into the kingdom of
the Son of God ; is actually within the covenant of
grace, and has that faith, which shall be imputed to him
for righteousness ; and, if he continues in his allegiance
to this his King, shall receive the reward, eternal life.

He that considers this, will not be so hot as the un-
masker, to contend for a number of fundamental ar
ticles, all necessary, every one of them, to be explicitly
believed by every one for salvation, without knowing
them himself, or being able to enumerate them to an
other. Can there be any thing more absurd than to say,
there are several fundamental articles, each of which
every man must explicitly believe, upon pain of damna- /
tion, and yet not be able to say, which they be ? The
unmasker has set down no small number ; but yet dares
not say, these are all. On the contrary, he has plainly
confessed there are more ; but will not, i. e. cannot tell
what they are, that remain behind ; nay, has given a
general description of his fundamental articles, by which
it is not evident, but there may be ten times as many as

230 A Second Vindication of the

those he had named ; and amongst them (if he durst, or
could name them) probably several that many a good
Christian 5 who died in the faith, and is now in heaven,
never once thought of; and others, which many, of as
good authority as he, would, from their different sys
tems, certainly deny and contradict.

This, as great an absurdity as it is, cannot be other
wise, whilst men will take upon them to alter the terms
of the gospel ; and when it is evident, that our Saviour
and his apostles received men into the church, and pro
nounced them believers, for taking him to be the Mes
siah, their King and deliverer, sent by God, have a bold
ness to say, " this is not enough." But, when you would
know of them, what then is enough, they cannot tell
you : the reason whereof is visible, viz. because they be
ing able to produce no other reason for their collection
of fundamental articles, to prove them necessary to be
believed, but because they are of divine authority, and
contained in the holy scriptures ; and are, as the un-
masker says, " writ there on purpose to be believed ; "
they know not where toi stop, when they have once be
gun : those texts that they leave out, or from which
they deduce none of their fundamentals, being of the
same divine authority, and so upon that account equally
fundamental with what they culled out, though not so
well suited to their particular systems.

Hence come those endless and unreasonable conten
tions about fundamentals, whilst each censures the de
fect, redundancy, or falsehood of what others require,
as necessary to be believed : and yet he himself gives not
a catalogue of his own fundamentals, which he will say
is sufficient and complete. Nor is it to be wondered ;
since, in this way, it is impossible to stop short of put
ting every proposition, divinely revealed, into the list
of fundamentals ; all of them being of divine, and so of
equal authority; and, upon that account, equally ne
cessary to be believed by every one that is a Christian,
though they are not all necessary to be believed, to make
any one a Christian. For the New Testament contain
ing the laws of the Messiah's kingdom, in regard of all
the actions, both of mind and body, of all his subjects ;

" ~:--£* £ f Reasonableness of Christianity, &;c . 23 1

every Christian is bound, by his allegiance to him, to be
lieve all that he says in it to be true ; as well as to assent,
that all he commands in it is just and good : and what
negligence, perverseness, or guilt there is, in his mis
taking in the one, or failing in his obedience to the
other, that this righteous judge of all men, who cannot
be deceived, will at the last day lay open, and reward
accordingly.

It is no wonder, therefore, there have been such fierce
contests, and such cruel havock made amongst Christians
about fundamentals ; whilst every one would set up his
system, upon pain of fire and faggot in this, and hell-
tire in the other world. Though, at the same time,
whilst he is exercising the utmost barbarities against
others, to prove himself a true Christian, he professes
himself so ignorant, that he cannot tell, or so uncharit
able, that he will not tell, what articles are absolutely
necessary and sufficient to make a man a Christian. If
there be any such fundamentals, as it is certain there
are, it is as certain they must be very plain. Why then
does every one urge and make a stir about fundamen
tals, and no body give a list of them ? but because (as
I have said) upon the usual grounds, they cannot : for
I will be bold to say, that every one who considers the
matter, will see, that either only the article of his being
the Messiah their King, which alone our Saviour and
his apostles preached to the unconverted world, and re
ceived those that believed it into the church, is the only
necessary article to be believed by an atheist, to make
him a Christian ; or else, that all the truths contained in
the New Testament, are necessary articles to be believed
to make a man a Christian : and that between these two,
it is impossible any-where to stand ; the reason whereof
is plain. Because, either the believing Jesus to be the
Messiah, i. e. the taking him to be our King, makes us
subjects and denizens of his kingdom, that is, chris-
tians : or else an explicit knowledge of, and actual obe
dience to the laws of his kingdom, is what is required
to make us subjects ; which, I think, it was never said
of any other kingdom. For a man must be a subject
before he is bound to obey.

A Second Vindication of the

Let us suppose it will be said here, that an obedience
to the laws of Christ's kingdom, is what is necessary to
make us subjects of it, without which we cannot be ad
mitted into it, i. e. be Christians : and, if so, this obe
dience must be universal ; I mean, it must be the same
sort of obedience to all the laws of this kingdom :
which, since no body says is in any one such as is wholly
free from errour, or frailty, this obedience can only lie
in a sincere disposition and purpose of mind, to obey
every one of the laws of the Messiah, delivered in the
New Testament, to the utmost of our power. Now,
believing right being one part of that obedience, as well
as acting right is the other part, the obedience of assent
must be implicitly to all that is delivered there, that it
is true. But for as much as the particular acts of an ex
plicit assent cannot go any farther than his understand
ing, who is to assent ; what he understands to be truth,
delivered by our Saviour, or the apostles commissioned
by him, and assisted by his Spirit, that he must necessa
rily believe : it becomes a fundamental article to him,
and he cannot refuse his assent to it, without renounc
ing his allegiance. For he that denies any of the doc
trines that Christ has delivered, to be true, denies him to
be sent from God, and consequently to be the Messiah ;
and so ceases to be a Christian. From whence it is evi
dent, that if any more be necessary to be believed to
make a man a Christian, than the believing Jesus to be
the Messiah, and thereby taking him for our King, it
cannot be any set bundle of fundamentals, culled out
of the scripture, with an omission of the rest, according
as best suits any one's fancy, system, or interest : but it
must be an explicit belief of all those propositions,
which he, according to the best of his understanding,
really apprehends to be contained and meant in the
scripture; and an implicit belief of all the rest, which
he is ready to believe, as soon as it shall please God,
upon his use of the means, to enlighten him, and make
them clear to his understanding. So that in effect, al
most every particular man in this sense has, or may
have, a distinct catalogue of fundamentals, each where
of it is necessary for him explicitly to believe, now that

Reasonableness of Christianity > 8$c. 233

he is a Christian ; whereof if he should disbelieve or deny
any one, he would cast off his allegiance, disfranchise
himself, and be no longer a subject of Christ's kingdom.
But, in this sense, no body can tell what is fundamental
to another, what is necessary for another man to believe.
This catalogue of fundamentals, every one alone can
make for himself: no body can fix it for him ; no body
can collect or prescribe it to another : but this is, ac
cording as God has dealt to every one the measure of
light and faith ; and has opened each man's understand
ing, that he may understand the scriptures. Whoever
has used what means he is capable of, for the informing
of himself, with a readiness to believe and obey what
shall be taught and prescribed by Jesus, his Lord and
King, is a true and faithful subject of Christ's kingdom ;
and cannot be thought to fail in any thing necessary to
salvation.

Supposing a man and his wife, barely by seeing the
wonderful things that Moses did, should have been per
suaded to put themselves under his government ; or by
reading his law, and liking it ; or by any other motive,
had been prevailed on sincerely to take him for their
ruler and law-giver ; and accordingly (renouncing their
former idolatry and heathenish pollutions) in token
thereof had, by baptism and circumcision, the initiating
ceremonies, solemnly entered themselves into that com
munion, under the law of Moses ; had they not, thereby,
been made denizens of the commonwealth of Israel,
and invested with all the privileges and prerogatives of
true children of Abraham, leaving to their posterity a
right to their share in the promised land, though they had
died before they had performed any other act of obedi
ence to that law; nay, though they had not known
whose son Moses was, nor how he had delivered the
children of Israel out of Egypt, nor whither he was lead
ing them ? I do not say, it is likely they should be so
far ignorant. But, whether they were or no, it was
enough that they took him for their prince and ruler,
with a purpose to obey him, to submit themselves en
tirely to his commands and conduct ; and did nothing
afterwards^ whereby they disowned or rejected his au-

234 A Second Vindication of the

thority over them. In that respect, none of. his laws
were greater or more necessary to be submitted to, one
than another, though the matter of one might be of
much greater consequence than of another. But a dis
obedience to any law of the least consequence, if it
carry with it a disowning of the authority that made it,
forfeits all, and cuts off such an offender from that com
monwealth, and all the privileges of it.

This is the case, in respect of other matters of faith,
to those who believe Jesus to be the Messiah, and take
him to be their King, sent from God, and so are already
Christians. It is not the opinion, that any one may have
of the weightiness of the matter, (if they are, without
their own fault, ignorant that our Saviour hath revealed
it,) that shall disfranchise them, and make them forfeit
their interest in his kingdom : they may still be good
subjects, though they do not believe a great many things,
which creed-makers may think necessary to be believed.
That which is required of them is a sincere endeavour
to know his mind, declared in the gospel, and an ex
plicit belief of all that they understand to be so. Not
to believe what he has revealed, whether in a lighter, or
more weighty matter, calls his veracity into question,
destroys his mission, denies his authority, and is a flat
disowning him to be the Messiah, and so overturns that
fundamental and necessary article whereby a man is a
Christian. But this cannot be done by a man's ignorance
or unwilful mistake of any of the truths published by
our Saviour himself, or his authorized and inspired mi
nisters, in the New Testament. Whilst a man knows
not that it was his will or meaning, his allegiance is
safe, though he believe the contrary.

If this were not so, it is impossible that any one should
be a Christian. For in some things we are ignorant,
and err all, not knowing the scriptures. For the holy
inspired writings, being all of the same divine autho
rity, must all equally in every article be fundamental,
and necessary to be believed ; if that be a reason, that
makes any one proposition in it necessary to be believed.
But the law of faith, the covenant of the gospel, being a
covenant of grace, and not of natural right, or debt 5

Reasonableness of Christianity , §c. 235

nothing can be absolutely necessary to be believed, but
what, by this new law of faith, God of his good pleasure
hath made to be so. And this, it is plain, by the preach
ing of our Saviour and his apostles, to all that believed
not already in him, was only the believing the only true
God, and Jesus to be the Messiah, whom he hath sent.
The performance of this puts a man within the cove
nant, arid is that, which God will impute to him for
righteousness. All the other acts of assent to other
truths, taught by our Saviour, and his apostles, are not
what make a man a Christian ; but are necessary acts of
obedience to be performed by one, who is a Christian ;
and therefore, being a Christian, ought to live by the
laws of Christ's kingdom.

Nor are we without some glimpse of light, why it
hath pleased God of his grace, that the believing Jesus
to be the Messiah should be that faith which he would
impute to men for righteousness. It is evident from
scripture, that our Saviour despised the shame and en- j| \y
dured the cross for the joy set before him ; which joy,
it is also plain, was a kingdom. But, in this kingdom,
which his Father had appointed to him, he could have
none but voluntary subjects ; such as leaving the king
dom of darkness, and of the prince of this world, with
all the pleasures, pomps, and vanities thereof would put
themselves under his dominion, and translate themselves
into his kingdom ; which they did, by believing and
owning him to be the Messiah their King, and thereby
taking him to rule over them. For the faith for which ^
God justifieth, is not an empty speculation, but a faith
joined with repentance, and working by love. And for
this, which was, in effect, to return to God himself, and
to their natural allegiance due to him, and to advance
as much as lay in them, the glory of the kingdom, which
he had promised his Son ; God was pleased to declare,
he would accept them, receive them to grace, and blot
out all their former transgressions.

This is evidently the covenant of grace, as delivered
in the scriptures : and if this be not, I desire any one to
tell me what it is, and what are the terms of it. It is
a law of faith, whereby God has promised to forgive all

236 A Second Vindication of the

our sins, upon our repentance and believing something ;
and to impute that faith to us for righteousness. Now I
ask, what it is by the law of faith, we are required to be
lieve ? For until that be known, the law of faith is not
distinctly known ; nor the terms of the covenant upon
which the all-merciful God graciously offers us salvation.
And, if any one will say, this is not known, nay, is not
easily and certainly to be known under the gospel, I
desire him to tell me, what the greatest enemies of
Christianity can say worse against it ? For a way pro
posed to salvation, that does not certainly lead thither,
or is proposed, so as not to be known, are very little
different as to their consequence ; and mankind would
be left to wander in darkness and uncertainty, with the
one as well as the other.

I do not write this for controversy's sake ; for had I
minded victory, I would not have given the unmasker
this new matter of exception. I know whatever is said,
he must be bawling for his fashionable and profitable
orthodoxy, and cry out against this too, which I have
here added, as socinianism ; and cast that name upon
all that differs from what is held by those he would re
commend his zeal to in writing. I call it bawling, for
whether what he has said be reasoning, I shall refer to
those of his own brotherhood, if he be of any brother
hood, and there be any that will join with him in his set
of fundamentals, when his creed is made.

Had I minded nothing but how to deal with him, I
had tied him up short to his list of fundamentals, with
out affording him topics of declaiming, against what I
have here said. But I have enlarged on this point, for
the sake of such readers, who, with the love of truth,
read books of this kind, and endeavour to inform them
selves in the things of their everlasting concernment :
it being of greater consideration with me to give any
light and satisfaction to one single person, who is really
concerned to understand, and be convinced of the
religion he professes, than what a thousand fashion
able, or titular professors of any sort of orthodoxy
shall say, or think of me, for not doing as they do;
i. e. for not saying after others, without understanding

Reasonableness of Christianity , &$c. £3?

what is said, or upon what grounds, or caring to un
derstand it.

Let us now consider his argument, to prove the ar
ticles he has given us to he fundamentals. In his
" Thoughts concerning the causes of atheism," p. 119,
he argues from 1 Tim. iii. 16, where he says " Chris-
" tianity is called a mystery ; that all things in chris-
" tianity are not plain, and exactly level to every com-
" mon apprehension ; and that every thing in christi-
" anity is not clear, and intelligible and comprehensible
" by the weakest noddle." Let us take this for proved
as much as he pleases ; and then let us see the force of
this subtile disputant's argument, for the necessity there
is, that every Christian man should believe those, which
he has given us for fundamental articles, out of the
epistles. The reason of that obligation, and the neces
sity of every man's and woman's believing in them, he
has laid in this, that they are to be found in the epistles,
or in the bible. This argument for them we have,
over and over again, in his " Socinianism unmasked,"
as here, p. 9, thus : " Are they set down to no purpose,
" in these inspired epistles ? Why did the apostles write
" these doctrines, was it not, that those they writ to*
" might give their assent to them ? " p. 22. " They
" are in our bibles, for that very purpose, to be belie v-
" ed," p. 25. Now I ask, Can any one more directly
invalidate all he says here, for the necessity of believing
his articles ? Can any one more apparently write booty,
than by saying, that " these his doctrines, these his
" fundamental articles " (which are, after his fashion, set
down between the 8th and 20th pages of this his first
chapter) are of necessity to be believed by every one,
before he can be a Christian, because they are in the
epistles and in the bible ; and yet affirm, that in Chris
tianity, i. e. in the epistles and in the bible, there are
mysteries, there are things " not plain, not clear, not
" intelligible to common apprehensions?" If his ar
ticles, some of which contain mysteries, are necessary
to be believed to make a man a Christian, because they
are in the bible ; then, according to this rule, it is ne
cessary for many men to believe what is not intelligible

238 A Second Vindication of the

to them ; what their noddles cannot apprehend, (as the
unmasker is pleased to turn the supposition of vulgar
people's understanding the fundamentals of their reli
gion into ridicule,) i. e. it is necessary for many men to
do, what is impossible for them to do, before they can be
Christians. But if there be several things in the bible,
and in the epistles, that are not necessary for men to be
lieve, to make them Christians : then all the unmasker's
arguments, upon their being in the epistles, are no
proofs, that all his articles are necessary to be believed
to make a man a Christian, because they are set down in
the epistles ; much less, because he thinks they may be
drawn, according to his system, out of what is set down
in the epistles. Let him, therefore, either confess these
and the like questions, " Why did the apostles write
" these ? Was it not, that those they write to, might
" give their assent to them ? Why should not every one
" of these evangelical truths be believed and embraced ?
" They are in our bibles, for that very purpose ; " and
the like ; to be impertinent and ridiculous. Let him
cease to propose them with so much ostentation, for
they can serve only to mislead unwary readers : or let
him unsay what he has said, of things " not plain to
" common apprehensions, not clear and intelligible."
Let him recant what he has said of mysteries in Chris
tianity. For I ask with him, p. 8, " where can we be
" informed, but in the sacred and inspired writings ? "
It is ridiculous to urge, that any thing is necessary to
be explicitly believed, to make a man a Christian, be
cause it is writ in the epistles, and in the bible ; unless
he confess that there is no mystery, nothing not plain,
or unintelligible to vulgar understandings, in the epis
tles, or in the bible.

This is so evident, that the unmasker himself, who,
p. 119, of his " Thoughts concerning the Causes of
" Atheism," thought it ridiculous to suppose, that the
vulgar should understand Christianity, is here of another
mind : and, p. 30, says of his evangelical doctrines and
articles, necessary to be assented to, that they are intel
ligible and plain ; there is no " ambiguity and doubt-
" fulness in them ; they shine with their own light, and

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 239
to an unprejudiced eye are plain, evident, and illus

trious."

To draw the un masker out of the clouds, and prevent
his hiding himself in the doubtfulness of his expressions,
I shall desire him to say directly, whether the articles,
which are necessary to be believed, to make a man a
Christian, and particularly those he has set down for
such, are all plain and intelligible, and such as may be
understood and comprehended (I will not say in the
unmasker's ridiculous way, by the weakest noddles, but)
by every illiterate country man and woman, capable of
church-communion ?

If he says, Yes ; then all mysteries are excluded out
of his articles necessary to be believed to make a man a
Christian. For that which can be comprehended by every
day-labourer, every poor spinster, .that is a member of
the church, cannot be a mystery. And, if what such
illiterate people cannot understand be required to be
believed, to make them Christians, the greatest part of
mankind are shut out from being Christians.

But the un masker has provided an answer, in these
words, p. 31, " There is" says he, "a difficulty in the
" doctrine of the trinity, and several truths of the gos-
" pel, as to the exact manner of the things themselves,
" which we shall never be able to comprehend, at least
" on this side of heaven : but there is no difficulty as
" to the reality and certainty of them, because we
" know they are revealed to us by God in the holy
" scriptures."

Which answer of " difficulty in the manner," and
" no difficulty in the reality," having the appearance
of a distinction, looks like learning ; but when it comes
to be applied to the case in hand, will scarce afford us
sense.

The question is about a proposition to be believed,
which must first necessarily be understood. For a man
cannot possibly give his assent to any affirmation or ne
gation, unless he understand the terms as they are joined
in that proposition, and has a conception of the thing
affirmed or denied, and also a conception of the thing,
concerning which it is affirmed or denied, as they are

240 A Second Vindication of the

there put tog-ether. But let the proposition be what it
will, there is no more to be understood than is expressed
in the terms of that proposition. If it be a proposition
concerning a matter of fact, it is enough to conceive,
and believe the matter of fact. If it be a proposition
concerning the manner of the fact, the manner of the
fact must also be believed, as it is intelligibly expressed
in that proposition ; v. g. should this proposition vtxpot
lygipovira* be offered as an article of faith, to an illiterate
countryman of England, he could not believe it : be
cause, though a true proposition, yet it being proposed
in words, whose meaning he understood not, he could
not give any assent to it. Put it into English, he un
derstands what is meant by the " dead shall rise." For
he can conceive, that the same man, who was dead and
senseless, should be alive again ; as well as he can, that
the same man, who is now in a lethargy, should awake
again ; or the same man that is now out of his sight,
and he knows not whether he be alive or dead, should
return and be with him again ; and so he is capable of
believing it, though he conceives nothing of the man
ner, how a man revives, wakes or moves. But none of
these manners of those actions being included in those
propositions, - the proposition concerning the matter of
fact (if it imply no contradiction in it) may be believed ;
and so all that is required may be done, whatever diffi
culty may be, as to the exact manner, how it is brought
about.

But where the proposition is about the manner, the
belief too must be of the manner, v. g. the article is,
" The dead shall be raised with spiritual bodies : " and
then the belief must be as well of this manner of the
fact, as of the fact itself. So that what is said here, by
the unmasker, about the manner, signifies nothing at
all in the case. What is understood to be expressed in
each proposition, whether it be of the manner, or not
of the manner, is (by its being a revelation from God)
to be believed, as far as it is understood : but no more
is required to be believed concerning any article, than
is contained in that article.

What the unmasker, for the removing of difficulties,

Reasonableness of Christianity, $$c. 241

adds farther, in these words, " But there is no difficulty
" as to the reality and certainty of the truths of the
" gospel ; because we know, they are revealed to us by
" God in the holy scripture;" is yet farther from signi
fying any thing to the purpose, than the former. The
question is about understanding, and in what sense they
are understood ; not believing several propositions, or
articles of faith, which are to be found in the scripture.
To this the un masker says, there can be " no difficulty
" at all as to their reality and certainty ; because they
" are revealed by God." Which amounts to no more
but this, that there is no difficulty at all in the under
standing and believing this proposition, " that whatever
" is revealed by God, is really and certainly true." But
is the understanding and believing this single proposi
tion, the understanding and believing all the articles of
faith necessary to be believed ? Is this all the explicit
faith a Christian need have ? If so, then a Christian need
explicitly believe no more, but this one proposition, viz.
That all the propositions between the two covers of his
bible, are certainly true. But I imagine the unmasker
will not think the believing this one proposition, is a
sufficient belief of all those fundamental articles, which
he has given us, as necessary to be believed to make a
man a Christian. For, if that will serve the turn, I
conclude he may make his set of fundamentals as large
and express to his system as he pleases : calvinists, ar-
minians, anabaptists, socinians, will all thus own the
belief of them, viz. that all that God has revealed in the
scripture, is really and certainly true.

But if believing this proposition, that all that is re
vealed by God in the scripture is true, be not all the
faith which the unmasker requires, what he says about
the reality and certainty of all truths revealed by God,
removes nothing of the difficulty. A proposition of di
vine authority is found in the scripture : it is agreed
presently between him and me, that it contains a real,
certain truth : but the difficulty is, what is the truth it
contains, to which he and I must assent ; v. g. the pro
fession of faith made by the eunuch, in these words,
" Jesus Christ is the son of God," upon which he was

A Second Vindication of the

admitted into the church, as a Christian, I believe, con
tains a " real and certain truth." Is that enough ? No,
says the unmasker, p. 87, it " includes in it, that Christ
" was God ;" and therefore it is not enough for me to
believe, that these words contain a real certain truth :
but I must believe, they contain this truth, that Jesus
Christ is God ; that the eunuch spoke them in that sense,
and in that sense I must assent to them : whereas they
appear to me to be spoken, and meant here, as well as
in several other places of the " New Testament," in this
sense, viz. " That Jesus Christ is the Messiah," and in
that sense, in this place, I assent to them. The mean
ing then of these words, as spoken by the eunuch, is the
difficulty : and I desire the unmasker, by the application
of what he has said here, to remove that difficulty. For
granting all revelation from God to be really and cer
tainly true, (as certainly it is,) how does the believing
that general truth remove any difficulty about the sense
and interpretation of any particular proposition, found
in any passage of the holy scriptures? Or is it possible
for any man to understand it in one sense, and believe
it in another ; because it is a divine revelation, that has
reality and certainty in it ? Thus much, as to what
the unmasker says of the fundamentals, he has given
iiSj p. 30, viz. That " no true lover of God and truth
61 need doubt of any of them : for there is no ambi-
" guity and doubtfulness in them." If the distinction
he has used, " of difficulty as to the exact manner, arid
" no difficulty as to the reality and certainty of gospel-
(i truths/' will remove all ambiguity and doubtfulness
from all those texts of scripture, from whence he and
others deduce fundamental articles, so that they will
ba " plain and intelligible " to every man, in the sense
he understands them ; he has done great service to
Christianity.

But he seems to distrust that himself, in the following
words : " They shine," says he, " with their own light,
6 and to an unprejudiced eye, are plain, evident, and
" illustrious; and they would always continue so, if
" some ill-minded men did not perplex and entangle
" them." I see the matter would go very smooth, if

Reasonableness of Christianity, §c. 243

the unmasker might be the sole, authentic interpreter
of scripture. He is wisely of that judge's mind, who
was against hearing the counsel on the other side, be
cause they always perplexed the cause.

But if those who differ from the unmasker, shall in
their turns call him the " prejudiced and ill-minded
" man," who perplexes these matters (as they may,
with as much authority as he), we are but where we
were; each must understand for himself, the best he
can, until the unmasker be received, as the only unpre
judiced man, to whose dictates every one, without exa
mination, is with an implicit faith to submit.

Here again, p. 32, the unmasker puts upon me, what
I never said : and therefore I must desire him to show,
where it is, that I pretend,

XI. That this " proposition," that Jesus is the Mes
siah, " is more intelligible, than any of those he
" has named."

In his " Thoughts concerning the causes of atheism,"
p. 120, he argues, that this proposition [Jesus is the
Messiah] has more difficulty in it, than the article of the
holy Trinity. And his proofs are worthy of an un
masker. " For," says he, " here is an Hebrew word
" first to be explained ; " or, (as he has this strong argu
ment again, " Socinianism unmasked," p. 32.) " Here
" first the name Jesus, which is of Hebrew extraction,
" though since grecized, must be expounded."

Answ. Jesus being a proper name, only denoting a
certain person, needs not to be expounded, of what ex
traction soever it be. Is this proposition, Jonathan, was
the son of Saul, king of Israel, any thing the harder,
because the three proper names in it, Jonathan, Saul,
and Israel, are of Hebrew extraction ? And is it not as
easy, and as "level to the understanding of the vulgar,"
as this, Arthur was the son of Henry, king of England ;
though neither of these names be of Hebrew extraction ?
Or cannot any vulgar capacity understand this proposi
tion, John Edwards writ a book, intitled, " Socinian-
" ism unmasked;" until the name of John, which is of
Hebrew extraction, be explained to him ? If this be so,
parents were best beware, how hereafter they give their

R 2

244 A Second Vindication of the

children scripture-names, if they cannot understand
what they say to one another about them, until these
names of Hebrew extraction are expounded to them ;
and every proposition, that is in writings and contracts,
made concerning persons, that have names of Hebrew
extraction, become thereby as hard to be understood,
as the doctrine of the holy trinity,

His next argument is just of the same size. The word
Messias must, he says, be explained too. Of what ex
traction soever it be, there needs no more explication of
it, than what our English bible gives of it, where it is
plain to any vulgar capacity, that it was used to denote
that King and Deliverer, whom God had promised. So
that this proposition, " Jesus is the Messiah," has no
more difficulty in it than this, Jesus is the promised
King and Deliverer ; or than this, Cyrus was king and
deliverer of Persia ; which, I think, requires not much
depth of Hebrew to be understood. He that understood
this proposition, and took Cyrus for his king, was a sub
ject, and a member of his kingdom ; and he that un
derstands the other, and takes Jesus to be his king, is
his subject, and a member of his kingdom. But if this
be as hard as it is to some men, to understand the doc
trine of the trinity, I fear many of the kings in the world
have but few true subjects. To believe Jesus to be the
Messiah, is (as he has been told, over and over again) to
take him for our King and Ruler, promised, and sent by
God. This is that which will make any one from a jew,
or heathen, to be a Christian. In this sense it is very in
telligible to vulgar capacities. Those who so understand
and believe it, are so far from " pronouncing these words
" as a spell/' (as the unmasker ridiculously suggests,
p. 33,) that they thereby become Christians.

But what if I tell the unmasker, that there is one Mr.
Edwards, who (when he speaks his mind without con
sidering how it will make for, or against him) in an
other place, thinks this proposition, " Jesus is the Mes-
" sias/' very easy and intelligible ? To convince him of
it, I shall desire him to turn to the 74th page of his
" Socinianism unmasked/' where he will find that Mr.
Edwards, without any great search into Hebrew extrac
tions, interprets " Jesus the Messiah," to signify this,

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 245

" That Jesus of Nazareth was that eminent and ex-
" traordinary person prophesied of long before, and
" that he was sent and commissioned by God : " which,
I think, is no very hard proposition to be understood.
But it is no strange thing, that that which was very easy
to an unmasker in one place, should be terribly hard in
another, where want of something better requires to
have it so.

Another argument that he uses to prove the articles
he has given us to be necessary to salvation, p. 22, is,
because they are doctrines which contain things, that in
their nature have an " immediate respect to the occa-
" sion, author, way, end, means, and issue of men's
" redemption and salvation." And here I desire him to
prove,

XII. That every one of his articles contains things
so immediately relating to the " occasion, author,
" way, means, and issue of our redemption and
" salvation, that no-body can be saved, without
" understanding the texts from whence he draws
" them, in the very same sense that he does ; and
" explicitly believing all these propositions that he
" has deduced, and all that he will deduce from
" scripture, when he shall please to complete his
" creed."

Page 23, he says of his fundamentals, " Not without
f( good reason, THEREFORE, I called them essential and
" integral parts of our Christian and evangelical faith :
" and why the Vindicator fleers at these terms, I know
" no reason, but that he cannot confute the application
" of them."

Answ. One would think by the word, Therefore,
which he uses here, that in the preceding paragraph, he
had produced some reason to justify his ridiculous use
of those terms, in his " Thoughts concerning atheism,"
p. 111. But nothing therein will be found tending to it.
Indeed, the foregoing paragraph begins with these words,
" Thus I have briefly set before the reader those evan-
" gelical truths, those Christian principles, which belong

24(5 A Second Vindication of the

" to the very essence of Christianity." Amongst these,
there is the word Essence : but that from thence, or any
thing else in that paragraph, the unmasked could, with
good sense, or any sense at all, infer, as he does, " not
" without good reason, THEREFORE I called them the
" ESSENTIAL and INTEGRAL parts of our Christian and
" evangelical faith ; " requires an extraordinary sort of
logic to make out. What, I beseech you, is your good
reason too, here, upon which you infer, cc Therefore,"
&c. ? For it is impossible for any one, but an un masker,
to find one word, justifying his use of the terms essen
tial and integral. But it would be a great restraint to
the running of the unmasker's pen, if you should not
allow him the free use of illative particles, where there
are no premises to support them : and if you should not
take affirmations without proof, for reasoning, you at
once strike off above three quarters of his book ; and he
will often, for several pages together, have nothing to
say. As for example, from p. 28 to p. 35.

But to show that I did not, without reason, say, his
use of the terms essential and integral, in the place be
fore quoted, was ridiculous ; I must mind my reader,
that, p. 109 of his " Thoughts concerning the causes
" of atheism," he having said that " the epistolary
" writings are fraught with other fundamentals, besides
" that one which I mention ; " and then having set
them down, he closes his catalogue of them thus :
" These are matters of faith contained in the epistles,
" and they are essential and integral parts of the gospel
" itself," p. 111. Now what could be more ridicu
lous, than, where the question is about fundamental
doctrines, which are essentials of the Christian religion,
without an assent to which a man cannot be a Christian ;
and so he himself calls them, p. 21, of his " Socinianism
" unmasked ; " that he should close the list he had made
of fundamental doctrines, i. e. essential points of the
Christian religion, with telling his reader, " These are
" essential and integral parts of the gospel itself? " i. e.
These, which I have given you for fundamental, for es
sential doctrines of the gospel, are the fundamental and
not fundamental, essential and not essential, parts of the

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. £47

gospel mixed together. For integral parts, in all the
writers I have met with, besides the unmasker, are con
tradistinguished to essential ; and signify such parts as
the thing can be without, but without them will not be
so complete and entire as with them. Just such an
acuteness, as our unmasker, would any one show, who
taking upon him to set down the parts essential to a
man, without the having of which he could not be a
man, should name the soul, the head, the heart, lungs,
stomach, liver, spleen, eyes, ears, tongue, arms, legs,
hair, and nails ; and, to make all sure, should conclude
with these words ; " These are parts contained " in a
man, " and are essential and integral parts of a man
" himself;" i.e. they are parts, without some of which
he cannot be a man ; and others, which though they
make the man entire, yet he may be a man without
them ; as a man ceases not to be a man, though he wants
a nail, a finger, or an arm, which are integral parts of a
man : " Risum teneatis ! " If the unmasker can make
any better sense of his " essential and integral parts of
" the gospel itself," I will ask his pardon for my laugh-
ing : until then he must not be angry, if the reader and
I laugh too. Besides, I must tell him, that those, which
he has set down, are not the " integral parts of the
*6 Christian faith," any more than the head, the trunk,
and the arms, hands, and thighs, are the integral parts
of a man : for a man is not entire without the legs and
feet too. They are some of the integral parts indeed ;
but cannot be called the integral parts, where any, that
go to make up the whole man, are left out ; nor those
the integral, but some of the integral parts of the Chris
tian faith, out of which any of the doctrines, proposed
in the " New Testament," are omitted : for whatever
is there proposed, is proposed to be believed, and so is a
part of the Christian faith.

Before I leave his catalogue of the " essential and in-
" tegral parts" of the gospel, which he has given us,
instead of one, containing the articles necessary to be
believed to make a man a Christian,, I must take notice
of what he says, whilst he is making1 it, p. 9 ' " Why
" then is there a treatise published, to tell the world,

248 A Second Vindication of the

(f that the bare belief of a Messiah, is all that is required
" of a Christian?" As if there were no difference be
tween believing a Messiah, and believing Jesus to be the
Messiah ; no difference between " required of a chris-
" tian," and required to make a man a Christian. As
if you should say, renouncing his former idolatry, and
being circumcised and baptized into Moses, was all that
was required to make a man an israelite ; therefore it
was all that was required of an israelite. For these two
falsehoods has he, in this one short sentence, thought fit
slily to father upon me, the " humble imitator of the
" Jesuits," as he is pleased to call me. And, therefore,
I must desire him to show,

XIII. Where the " world is told, in the treatise that
" I published, That the bare belief of a Messiah is
" all that is required of a Christian."

The six next pages, i. e. from the twenty-eighth to
the end of his second chapter, being taken up with no
thing but pulpit oratory, out of its place ; and without
any reply, applied, or applicable to any thing I have
said, in my Vindication ; I shall pass by, until he shows
any thing in them that is so.

In page 36, this giant in argument falls on me, and
mauls me unmercifully, about the epistles. He begins
thus : " The gentleman is not without his evasions, and
" he sees it is high time to make use of them. This puts
" him in some disorder. For, when he comes to speak
" of my mentioning his ill treatment of the epistles, —
" you may observe, that he begins to grow warmer than
" before. Now this meek man is nettled, and one may
" perceive he is sensible of the scandal that lie hath
" given to good people, by his slighting the epistolary
" writings of the holy apostles ; yet he is so cunning as
" to disguise his passion as well as he can." Let all this
impertinent and inconsistent stuff be so. I am angry
and cannot disguise it, I am cunning and would disguise
it, but yet, the quick-sighted unmasker has found me
out, that I am nettled. What does all this notable pro
logue of " hictius doctius/' of a cunning man, and in

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 249

effect " no cunning man, in disorder, warmed, nettled,
" in a passion," tend to ? but to show, that these fol
lowing words of mine. p. 170, of rny Vindication, viz.
" I require you to publish to the world those passages
" which show my contempt of the epistles," are so full
of heat and disorder, that they need no other answer :
" But what need I, good sir, do this, when you have
" done it yourself?" A reply I own, very soft; and
whether I may not say, very silly, let the reader judge.
The unmasker having accused me of contemning the
epistles, my reply, in my Vindication, ibid, was thus :
" Sir, when your angry fit is over, and the abatement
" of your passion has given way to the return of your
" sincerity, I shall beg you to read this passage in the
" 154th page of my book : These holy writers (viz. the
" penmen of the epistles) inspired from above, writ no-
" thing but truth ; and in most places very weighty
" truths to us now ; for the expounding, clearing and
" confirming of the Christian doctrine, and establishing
" those in it, who had embraced it." And again, p.
156, " The other parts [i. e. besides the gospels and the
" Acts] of DIVINE REVELATION are objects of faith,
" and are so to be received ; they are truths, of which
" none that is once known to be such, i. e. revealed,
" may, or ought to be disbelieved. And if this does not
" satisfy you, that I have as high a veneration for the
" epistles as you, or any one can have, I require you to
" publish to the world those PASSAGES which show my
" contempt of them." After such direct words of mine,
expressing my veneration for that part of divine revela
tion, which is contained in the epistles, any one, but an
unmasker, would blush to charge me with contempt of
them ; without alleging, when summoned to it, any
word in my book to justify that charge.

If hardness of forehead were strength of brains, it
were two to one of his side against any man I ever yet
heard of. I require him to publish to the world, those
passages, that show my contempt of the epistles;
and he answers me, " He need not do it, for I have
if done it myself." Whoever had common sense,
would understand, that what I demanded was, that he

&50 A Second Vindication of the

should show the world where, amongst all I had pub
lished, there were any passages that expressed con
tempt of the epistles : for it was not expected he should
quote passages of mine, that I had never published.
And this acute un masker (to this) says, I had published
them myself. So that the reason why he cannot find
them, is, because I had published them myself. But,
says he, " I appeal to the reader, whether (after your
" tedious collection out of the four evangelists) your
" passing by the epistles, and neglecting wholly what
" the apostles say in them ; " be not publishing to the
" world your contempt of them ? " I demand of him to
publish to the world those passages, which show my
contempt of the epistles : and he answers, " He need
" not, I have done it myself." How does that appear?
I have passed by the epistles, says he. My passing
them by then, are passages published against the epis
tles ? For " publishing of passages" is what you said, you
" need not do," and what " I had done." So that the
passages I have published containing a contempt of the
epistles, are extant in my saying nothing of them?
Surely this same passing by has done some very shrewd
displeasure to our poor unmasker, that he so starts when
ever it is but named, and cannot think it contains less
than exclusion, defiance, and contempt. Here there
fore the proposition remaining to be proved by you,
is,

XIV. " That one cannot pass by any thing, without
" contempt of it."

And when you have proved it, I shall then ask you,
what will become of all those parts of scripture, all
those chapters and verses, that you have passed by, in
your collection of fundamental articles? Those that
you have vouchsafed to set down, you tell us, " are in
" the bible, on purpose to be believed." What must
become of all the rest, which you have omitted ? Are
they there not to be believed ? And must the reader un
derstand your passing them by, to be a publishing to the
world your contempt of them ? If so, you have unmasked

Reasonableness of Christianity, &$c. 251

yourself: If not, but you may pass by some parts of
scripture, nay, whole epistles,, as you have those of St.
James and St. Jude, without contempt ; why may not
I, without contempt, pass by others ; but because you
have a liberty to do what you will, and I must do but
what you, in your good pleasure, will allow me ? But if
I ask you, whence you have this privilege above others ;
you will have nothing to say, except it be, according to
your usual skill in divining, that you know my heart,
and the thoughts that are in it, which you find not like
yours, right orthodox, and good ; but always evil and
perverse, such as I dare not own ? but hypocritically
either say nothing of or declare against : but yet, with
all my cunning, I cannot hide them from you ; your all-
knowing penetration always finds them out : you know
them, or you guess at them, as is best for your turn, and
that is as good : and then presently I am confounded.
I doubt, whether the world has ever had any two-eyed
man your equal, for penetration and a quick sight.
The telling by the spectator's looks, what card he guesses,
is nothing to what you can do. You take the height of
an author's parts, by numbering the pages of his book ;
you can spy an heresy in him, by his saying not a sylla
ble of it ; distinguish him from the orthodox, by his
understanding places of scripture, just as several of the
orthodox do ; you can repeat by heart whole leaves of
what is in his mind to say, before he speaks a word of
it ; you can discover designs before they are hatched,
and all the intrigues of carrying them on, by those who
never thought of them. All this and more you can do,
by the spirit of orthodoxy ; or, which is as certain, by
your own good spirit of invention informing you. Is
not this to be an errant conjurer?

But to your reply. You say, " After my TEDIOUS
t( collection out of the four evangelists, my passing by
" the epistles, and neglecting wholly what the apostles
" say," &c. I wondered at first why you mentioned not
the Acts here, as well as the four evangelists : for I have
not, as you have in other places observed, been sparing
of collections out of the Acts too. But there was, it
seems, a necessity here for your omitting it : for that

252 A Second Vindication of the

would have stood too near what followed, in these
words ; and " neglecting wholly what the apostles say."
For if it appeared to the reader, out of your own con
fession, that I allowed and built upon the divine autho
rity of what the apostles say in the Acts, he could not
so easily be misled into an opinion, that I contemned
what they say in their epistles. But this is but a slight
touch of your leger-de-rnain.

And now I ask the reader, what he will think of a
minister of the gospel, who cannot bear the texts of
scripture I have produced, nor my quotations out of the
four evangelists? This, which in his "Thoughts of the
" causes of atheism," p. 114, was want of "vivacity
" and elevation of mind," want of " a vein of sense
" and reason, yea, and of elocution too;" is here, in
his " Sociniariism unmasked," a " tedious collection
" out of the four evangelists." Those places I have
quoted lie heavy, it seems, upon his stomach, and are
too many to be got off. But it was my business not to
omit one of them, that the reader might have a full
view of the whole tenour of the preaching of our Saviour
and his apostles, to the unconverted jews and gentiles ;
and might therein see, what faith they were converted to,
and upon their assent to which, they were pronounced
believers, and admitted into the Christian church. But
the unmasker complains, there are too many of them :
he thinks the gospel, the good news of salvation, tedious
from the mouth of our Saviour and his apostles : he is
of opinion, that before the epistles were writ, and with
out believing precisely what he thinks fit to cull out of
them, there could be no Christians ; and if we had no
thing but the four evangelists, we could not be saved.
And yet it is plain, that every single one of the four
contains the gospel of Jesus Christ ; and, at least, they
altogether contain all that is necessary to salvation. If
any one doubt of this, I refer him to Mr. Chillingworth
for satisfaction, who hath abundantly proved it.

His following words (were he not the same unmasker
all through) would be beyond parallel : " But let us hear
" why the vindicator did not attempt to collect any
" articles out of these writings ; he assigns this as one

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 253

" reason : " The epistles being writ to those who were
" already believers, it could not be supposed that they
" were writ to them, to teach them fundamentals,"
p. 167, Yindic. " Certainly no man would have con-
" jectured, that he would have used such an evasion as
" this. I will say that for him, he goes beyond all sur-
" mises, he is above all conjectures, he hath a faculty
" which no creature on earth can ever fathom." Thus
far the unmasker, in his oratorical strain. In what fol
lows, he comes to his closer reasoning, against what
I have said. His words are, " do we not know, that the
" four gospels were writ to, and for believers, as well
" as unbelievers?'3 Answ. I grant it. Now let us see
your inference ; therefore what these holy historians
recorded, that our Saviour and his apostles said and
preached to unbelievers, was said and preached to be
lievers. The discourse which our Saviour had with the
woman of Samaria, and her townsmen, was addressed to
believers ; because St. John writ his gospel (wherein it
is recorded as a part of our Saviour's history) for be
lievers, as well as unbelievers. St. Peter's preaching to
Cornelius, and St. Paul's preaching at Antioch, at Thes-
salonica, at Corinth, &c. was not to unbelievers, for
their conversion : because St. Luke dedicates his history
of the Acts of the apostles to Theophilus, who was a
Christian, as the unmasker strenuously proves in this
paragraph. Just as if he should say, that the discourses,
which Caesar records he had upon several occasions with
the Gauls, were not addressed to the Gauls alone, but to
the Romans also ; because his commentaries were writ
for the Romans, as well as others ; or that the sayings
of the ancient Greeks and Romans in Plutarch, were not
spoken by them to their contemporaries only, because
they are recorded by him for the benefit of posterity.

I perused the preachings of our Saviour and his apos
tles to the unconverted world, to see what they taught
and required to be believed, to make men Christians :
and all these I set down, and leave the world to judge
what they contained. The epistles, which were all
written to those who had embraced the faith and were
all Christians already, I thought would not so distinctly

Q5 4 A Second Vindication of the

show, what were those doctrines which were absolutely
necessary to make men Christians ; they being not writ
to convert unbelievers, but to build up those who were
already believers, in their most holy faith. This is
plainly expressed in the epistle to the Hebrews, chap. v.
11, &c. " Of whom (i. e. Christ) we have many things
" to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are all dull
" of hearing. For when for the time ye ought to be
" teachers, ye have need that one teach you again., which
" be the first principles of the oracles of God ; and are
" become such as have need of milk, and not of strong
" meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in
" the word of righteousness ; for he is a babe : but
" strong meat belongeth to him that is full of age, even
" those who by reason of use have their senses exercised,
" to discern both good and bad. Therefore leaving
" the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on
" unto perfection, not laying again the foundation of
" repentance from dead works, and of faith towards
" God, and of the doctrine of baptism, and of laying on
" of hands, and of the resurrection of the dead, and of
" eternal judgment." Here the apostle shows, what
was his design in writing this epistle, not to teach them
the fundamental doctrines of the Christian religion, but
to lead them on to more perfection ; that is, to greater
degrees of knowledge, of the wise design, and wonderful
contrivance, and carrying on of the gospel, and the evi
dence of it ; which he makes out in this epistle, by
showing its correspondence with the Old Testament,
and particularly with the oeconomy of the mosaical
constitution. Here I might ask the unmasker, Whe
ther those many things which St. Paul tells the Hebrews,
he had to say of Christ, (hard to be uttered to them, be
cause they were dull of hearing,) had not an " imme-
" diate respect to the occasion, author, way, means, or
" issue of their redemption and salvation ?" And there
fore, " whether they were such things, without the
" knowledge of which they could not be saved ? " as the
unmasker says of such things, p. 23. And the like I
might ask him, concerning those things which the apos
tle tells the Corinthians, 1 epist. chap. iii. 2, that they

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. S55

" were not able to bear." For much to the same pur
pose he speaks to the Corinthians, epist. 1. chap. iii. as
in the above-cited places he did to the Hebrews : " That
" he, as a wise master-builder, had laid the foundation : "
and that foundation he himself tells us, is, " Jesus the
" Messiah ; " and that there is no other foundation to
be laid. And that in this he laid the foundation of
Christianity at Corinth, St. Luke records, Acts xviii. 4,
in these words, " Paul, at Corinth, reasoned in the sy->
" nagogue every sabbath-day, and testified to the jews,
" that Jesus was the Messiah." Upon which founda
tion, he tells them, there might be a superstructure.
But that, what is built on the foundation, is not the
foundation, I think I need not prove. He further tells
them, that he had desired to build upon this foundation ;
but withal says, he had fed them until then " with milk,
" and not with meat ; because they were babes, and had
" not been able to bear it, neither were they yet able/'
And therefore this epistle, we see, is almost wholly spent
in reproofs of their miscarriages, and in exhortations and
instructions relating to practice ; and very little said in
it, for the explaining any part of the great mystery of
salvation, contained in the gospel.

By these passages we may see (were it not evident to
common sense itself, from the nature of things) that the
design of these epistles was not to lay the foundations, or
teach the principles of the Christian religion ; they being
writ to those who received them, and were Christians
already. The same holds in all the other epistles ; and
therefore the epistles seemed not to me the properest
parts of scripture to give us that foundation, distinct
from all the superstructures built on it ; because in the
epistles, the latter was the thing proposed, rather than
the former. For the main intention of the apostles, in
writing their epistles, could not be to do what was done
already ; to lay down barely the foundations of Christi
anity, to those who were Christians already : but to build
upon it some farther explication of it, which either their
particular circumstances, or a general evidencing of the
truth, wisdom, excellencies, and privileges, &c. of the

256 A Second Vindication of the

gospel required. This was the reason that persuaded me
to take the articles of faith, absolutely necessary to be
received to make a man a Christian, only from the preach
ings of our Saviour and his apostles to the unconverted
world, as laid down in the historical part of the New
Testament : and I thought it a good reason, it being past
doubt, that they in their preachings proposed to the un
converted, all that was necessary to be believed, to make
them Christians ; and also, that that faith, upon a pro
fession whereof any one was admitted into the church,
as a believer, had all that was necessary in it to make
him a Christian ; because, if it wanted any thing ne
cessary, he had necessarily not been admitted : unless we
can suppose, that any one was admitted into the Christian
church by our Saviour and his apostles, who was not yet
a Christian ; or pronounced a believer, who yet wanted
something necessary to make him a believer, i. e. was a
believer and not a believer, at the same time. But what
those articles were which had been preached to those,
to whom the epistles were writ, and upon the belief
whereof they had been admitted into the Christian
church, and became as they are called " believers,
" saints, faithful, elect," &c. could not be collected
out of the epistles. This, though it were my reason, and
must be a reason to every one, who would make this in
quiry ; and the unmasker quotes the place where I told
him it was my reason; yet he, according to his never-
erring illumination, flatly tells me, p. 38, that it was not ;
and adds, " Here then is want of sincerity/' &c. I must
desire him, therefore, to prove what he says, p. 38, viz,

XV. That, " by the same argument, that I would
" persuade, that the fundamentals are not to be
" sought for in the epistles, he can prove that they
" are not to be sought for in the gospels and in
" the Acts ; because even these were writ to those
" that believed."

And next I desire him to prove, what he also says in
the same page, viz.

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 257

XVI. That " the epistles being- writ to those that
" believed, was not an argument that I did make
" use of."

He tells us, p. 38, that it is the argument whereby I
would persuade : and in the very same page, a few lines
lower, says, " That it is not the argument I did make
" use of." Who, but an errant unmasker, would con
tradict himself so flatly in the same breath ? And yet,
upon that, he raises a complaint of my " want of sin-
" cerity."

For " want of sincerity " in one of us, we need not
go far for an instance. The next paragraph, p. 38 — 40,
affords us a gross one of it : wherein the unmasker ar
gues strongly, not against any thing I had said, but
against an untruth of his own setting up. Towards the
latter end of the paragraph, p. 40, he has these words :
" It is manifest, that the apostles in their epistles, taught
" fundamentals : which is contrary to what this gentle-
" man says, that such a thing could not be supposed."
And therefore the unmasker has taken a great deal of
pains to show, that there are fundamental doctrines to
be found in the epistles ; as if I had denied it. And to
lead the reader into an opinion that I had said so, he set
down these words, " could not be supposed ; " as if they
were my words. And so they are, but not to that pur
pose. And therefore he did well not to quote the page,
lest the reader, by barely turning to the place, should
have a clear sight of falsehood, instead of that sincerity,
which he would make the reader believe is wanting in
me. My words, p. 153, of " The reasonableness of
" Christianity," are, NOR CAN IT BE SUPPOSED, that
" the sending of such fundamentals was the reason of
" the apostles writing to any of them." And a little
lower : " The epistles therefore being all written to those
" that were already believers and Christians, the occa-
" sion and end of writing them could not be, to in-
" struct them in that which was necessary to make
" them Christians." The thing then, that I denied,
was not, that there were any fundamentals in the epis
tles. For in the next page I have these express words ;

8

258 A Second Vindication of the

" I do not deny, but the great doctrines of the Christian
" faith are dropt here and there, and scattered up and
" down in most of them." And therefore he might
have spared his endeavours, in the next paragraph, to
prove, that there may be fundamentals found in the
epistles, until he finds somebody that denies it. And
here again, I must repeat my usual question, that with
this sincere writer is so often necessary, viz.

XVII. Where it is that I say, " That it cannot be
" supposed, that there are fundamental articles in
" the epistles ?"

If he hopes to shift it off by the word Taught, which
seems fallaciously put in ; as if he meant, that there
were some fundamental articles taught, necessary to be
believed to make them Christians, in the epistles, which
those whom they were writ to, knew not before : in this
sense I do deny it : and then this will be the

XVIIIth proposition remaining upon him to prove,
viz.

" That there are fundamental articles necessary to be
" believed to make a man a Christian taught in the
" epistles, which those, whom they were writ to,
" knew not before."

The former part of his next paragraph, p. 40, runs
thus : " Hear another feigned ground of his omitting
" the epistles, viz. because the fundamental articles are
" here promiscuously, and without distinction, mixed
" with other truths," p. 41. " But who sees not, that
" this is a mere elusion ? For on the same account he
" might have forborn to search for fundamental articles
" in the gospels ; for they do not lie there together, but
" are dispersed up and down. The doctrinal and histo-
" rical parts are mixed with one another, but he pre-
" tends to sever them. Why then did he not make a
" separation between the doctrines in the epistles, and
" those other matters that are treated of there ? He has

Reasonableness of Christianity, <fyc. 259

" nothing to reply to this, and therefore we must again
" look upon what he has suggested, as a cast of his shuf-
" fling faculty."

The argument contained in these words is this : A
man cannot well distinguish fundamental from non-
fundamental doctrines in the epistles, where they are
promiscuously mixed with non-fundamental doctrines :
therefore he cannot well distinguish fundamental doc
trines from others in the gospels, and the Acts, where
they are mixed with matters of fact. As if he should
say, one cannot well distinguish a bachelor of divinity
from other divines, where several of them stand toge
ther promiscuously in the same habit ; therefore one
cannot distinguish a bachelor of divinity from a Bil
lingsgate orator, where they stand together in their dis
tinct habits : or that it is as easy to distinguish fine gold
from that of a little lower alloy, where several pieces of
each are mixed together ; as it is to distinguish pieces
of fine gold from pieces of silver, which they are mixed
amongst.

But it seems, the un masker thinks it as easy to distin
guish between fundamental and not fundamental doc
trines, in a writing of the same author, where they are
promiscuously mixt together, as it is to distinguish be
tween a fundamental doctrine of faith, and a relation of
a matter of fact, where they are intermixedly reported
in the same history. When he has proved this, the un-
masker will have more reason to tax me with elusion,
shuffling, and feigning, in the reason I gave for not col
lecting fundamentals out of the epistles. Until then, all
that noise must stand amongst those ridiculous airs of
triumph and victory which he so often gives himself,
without the least advantage to his cause, or edification
of his reader, though he should a thousand times say,
" That I have nothing to reply."

In the latter part of his paragraph, he says, " That
" necessary truths, fundamental principles, may be dis-
" tinguished from those that are not such, in the epis-
" tolary writings, by the nature and importance of
" them, foy their immediate respect to the author and
'•' the means of our salvation." Answ. If this be so, I

s 2

£60 A Second Vindication of the

desire him to give me a definitive collection of funda
mentals out of the Epistles, as I have given one out of
the Gospels and the Acts. If he cannot do that, it is
plain, he hath here given a distinguishing mark of funda
mentals, hy which lie himself cannot distinguish them.
But yet I am the shuffler.

The argument in the next paragraph, p. 41, is
this :

" Necessary doctrines of faith, such as God abso-
" lutely demands to he believed for justification, may be
" distinguished from rules of holy living, with which
" they are mixed in the epistles : therefore doctrines of
" faith necessary, and not necessary to be believed to
" make a man a Christian, may be distinguished, as
" they stand mixed in the epistles." Which is as good
sense as to say, lambs and kids may easily be distin
guished in the same pen, where they are together, by
their different natures : therefore the lambs I absolutely
demand of you, as necessary to satisfy me, may be dis
tinguished from others in the same pen, where they
are mixed without any distinction. Doctrines of faith,
and precepts of practice}, are as distinguishable as doing
and believing ; and those as easily discernible one from
another, as -thinking and walking: but doctrinal propo
sitions, all of them of divine revelation, are of the same
authority, and of the same species, in respect of the
necessity of believing them ; and will be eternally un-
distinguishable into necessary, and not necessary to be
believed, until there be some other way found to distin
guish them, than that they are in a book, which is all
of divine revelation. Though therefore doctrines of
faith and rules of practice are very distinguishable in
the epistles, yet it does not follow from thence, that
fundamental and not fundamental doctrines, points ne
cessary and not necessary to be believed to make men
Christians, are easily distinguishable in the epistles.
Which, therefore, remains to be proved : and it remains
incumbent upon him,

XVIII. " To set down the marks, whereby the doc-
" trines, delivered in the epistles, may easily and

Reasonableness of Christiartitg, fyc. £61

" exactly be distinguished into fundamental, arid
" not fundamental articles of faith."

All the rest of that paragraph containing nothing
against me, must be bound up with a great deal of the
like stuff, which the tinmasker has put into his book, to
show the world he does not " imitate me in imperti-
" nencies, incoherences, and trifling excursions/' as he
boasts in his first paragraph. Only I shall desire the
reader to take the whole passage concerning this matter,
as it stands in my (C Reasonableness of Christianity,"
p. 154. " I do not deny but the great doctrines of the
" Christian faith are dropt here and there, and scat-
" tered up and down in most of them. But it is not
" in the epistles we are to learn what are the funda-
" mental articles of faith, where they are promiscu-
" ously, and without distinction, mixed with other
" truths and discourses, which were (though for edifi-
" cation indeed, yet) only occasional. We shall find
" and discern those great and necessary points best, in
" the preaching of our Saviour and his apostles, to
" those who were yet strangers and ignorant of the
" faith, to bring them in and convert them to it."
And then let him read these words, which the unmasker
has quoted out of them : " It is not in the epistles that
" we are to learn what are the fundamental articles of
" faith ; they were written for the resolving of doubts,
" and reforming of mistakes ; " with his introduction
of them in these words : " he commands the reader not
" to stir a jot further than the Acts." If 1 should ask
him where that command appears, he must have re
course to his old shift, that he did not mean as he said,
or else stand convicted of a malicious untruth. An
orator is not bound to speak strict truth, though a dis
putant be. But this unmasker's writing against me
will excuse him from being of the latter : and then why
may not falsehoods pass for rhetorical flourishes, in one
who has been used to popular haranguing ; to which men
are not generally so severe, as strictly to examine them,
and expect that they should always be found to con
tain nothing but precise truth and strict reasoning ? But

262 A 'Second Vindication of the

yet Imust not forget to put upon his score this other pro
position of his, which he has, p. 42, and ask him to show,

XIX. " Where it is that I command my reader not
" to stir a jot farther than the Acts? "

In the next two paragraphs, p. 42 — 46, theunmasker
is at his natural play, of declaiming without proving.
It is pity the Mishna, out of which he takes his good
breeding, as it told him, that " a well-bred and well-
" taught man answers to the first, in the first place,"
had not given him this rule too, about order, viz. That
proving should go before condemning ; else all the
fierce exaggerations ill language can heap up, are but
empty scurrility. But it is no wonder that the Jewish
doctors should not provide rules for a Christian divine,
turned unmasker. For where a cause is to be main
tained, and a book to be writ, and arguments are not at
hand, yet something must be found to fill it ; railing in
such cases is much easier than reasoning, especially
where a man's parts lie that way.

The first of these paragraphs, p. 42, he begins thus :
" But let us hear further what this vindicator saith to
" excuse his rejection of the doctrines contained in the
" epistles, and his putting us off with one article of
" faith." And then he quotes these following words
of mine : " What if the author designed his treatise, as
" the title shows, chiefly for those who were not yet
" thoroughly and firmly Christians : purposing to work
" those, who either wholly disbelieved, or doubted of
" the truth of the Christian religion ?

Aris. This, as he has put it, is a downright falsehood.
For the words he quotes were not used by me, " to ex-
" cuse my rejection of the doctrines contained in the
" epistles," or to prove there was but one article ; but
as a reason why I omitted the mention of satisfaction.

To demonstrate this, I shall set down the whole pas
sage, as it is, p. 163, 164, of my Vindication, where it
runs thus :

" But what will become of me that I have not men-
" tioned satisfaction ? "

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc.

" Possibly this reverend gentleman would have had
" charity enough for a known writer of the brother-
" hood, to have found it by an innuendo in those words
" above quoted, of laying down his life for another.
" But every thing is to be strained here the other way.
" For the author of the " Reasonableness of christi-
" anity, &c." is of necessity to be represented as a soci-
" nian ; or else his book may be read, and the truths
" in it, wliich Mr. Edwards likes not, be received ;
" and people put upon examining. Thus one, as full
" of happy conjectures and suspicions as this gentle-
" man, might be apt to argue. But what if the author
" designed his treatise, as the title shows, chiefly for
" those who were not yet thoroughly or firmly chris-
" tians ; proposing to work on those, who either wholly
" disbelieved, or doubted of the truth of the Christian
" religion ? "

To this he tells rne, p. 43, that my " title says no-
" thing for me," i. e. shows not that I designed my
book for those that disbelieved, or doubted of the Chris
tian religion.

Answ. I thought that a title that professed the rea- j
sonableness of any doctrine, showed it was intended for \
those that were not fully satisfied of the reasonableness
of it ; unless books are to be writ to convince those of
any thing, who are convinced already. But possibly this
may be the unmasker's way : and if one should judge by
his manner of treating this subject, with declamation
instead of argument, one would think that he meant it
for nobody but those who were of his mind already.
I thought therefore, " the Reasonableness of Christi-
" anity, as delivered in the Scripture," a proper title to
signify whom it was chiefly meant for : and, I thank
God, I can with satisfaction say, it has not wanted its
effect upon some of them. But the unmasker proves
for all that, that I could not design it chiefly for disbe
lievers or doubters of the Christian religion. <; For,
" says, he, p. 43, how those that wholly disregard and
" disbelieve the scriptures of the New Testament, as
" gentiles, jews, mahometans, and atheists do," (I
crave leave to put in theists, instead of atheists, for a

£64 A Second Vindication of the

reason presently to be mentioned) " are like to attend
" to the Reasonableness of Christianity, as delivered in
" the Scripture, is not to be conceived : and therefore
" we look upon this as all mere sham and sophistry."
Answ. Though the unmasker teaches good breeding
out of the JVIishna, yet I thought he had been a minister
of the gospel, and had taught Christianity out of the
scripture, Why ! good sir, would you teach jews and
mahometans Christianity out of the talmud and alcoran ;
because they are the books that at present they attend
to, and believe ? Or would you, laying by the authority
of all books, preach religion to infidels, in your own
name, and by your own authority, laying aside the
scripture? " Is it not to be conceived," no not by a
Christian divine, that the way to make unbelievers chris-
tians, is to show them the reasonableness of the religion
contained in the scriptures? But it seems the unmasker
has a peculiar way of preaching and propagating Chris
tianity without the scripture ; as some men have a pe
culiar way of disputing without reason.

In the beginning of this paragraph, p. 43, the un
masker, that is always a fair interpreter of my meaning,
and never fails to know it better than I do, tells me,
That by those that wholly disbelieve, " I must mean
" atheists, turks, jews, arid pagans ; and by those that
" are not firmly Christians, a few weak Christians."
But did our unmasker never hear of unbelievers, under
a denomination distinct from that of atheists, turks,
jews, and pagans ? Whilst the pulpit and the press have
so often had up the name of theists or deists, has that
name wholly escaped him ? It was these I chiefly de
signed, and I believe, nobody of all that read my Vin
dication, but the unmasker, mistook me, if he did. But,
there at least, p. 165., he might have found the name, as
of a sort of unbelievers not unknown amongst us. But,
whatever he thought, it was convenient, and a sort of
prudence in him (when he would persuade others that
I had not a design, which I say I had) to lessen as much
as he could, and cover the need of any such design ; and
so make it, that I could not intend my book to work
upon those that disbelieved, or did not firmly believe ;

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 265

by insinuating, there were few or none such amongst
us. Hence he says, that by those that are not thoroughly
and firmly Christians, " I mean a FEW weak Christians ; "
as well, as under those who wholly disbelieve, he left the
theist out of my meaning. I am very glad to hear from
the un masker, that there are but few weak Christians,
few that have doubts about the truth of Christianity
amongst us. But if there be not a great number of
deists, and that the preventing their increase be not
worth every true Christian's care and endeavours, those
who have been so loud against them, have been much to
blame ; and I wish to God there were no reason for their
complaints. For these, therefore, I take the liberty to
say, as I did before, that I chiefly designed my book ;
and shall not be ashamed of this sophistry, as you call
it, if it can be sophistry to allege a matter of fact that I
know ; until you have arguments to convince me, that
you know my intention in publishing it, better than I
do myself. And I shall think it still no blameable pru
dence, however you exclaim against prudence, (as per
haps you have some reason,) that " I mentioned only
" those advantages, that all Christians are agreed in ;
" and that I observed that command of the apostle,
" Rom. xiv. 1, " Him that is weak in the faith receive
" ye, but not to doubtful disputations ; " without being
" a socinian. I think I did not amiss, that I offered to
" the belief of those that stood off, that, and only that,
" which our Saviour and his apostles preached for the
" reducing the unconverted world. And would any one
6- think, he in earnest went about to persuade men to be
" Christians, who should use that as an argument to re-
" commend the gospel, which he has observed men to
" lay hold on as an objection against it ? To urge such
" points of controversy as necessary articles of faith,
" when we see our Saviour and the apostles urged them
" not as necessary to be believed to make men Christians,
" is (by our own authority) to add prejudices to pre-
" judices, and to block up our own way to those men,
" whom we would have access to and prevail upon."

I have repeated this again out of the 164th page of
my Vindication, where there is more to the same pur-

266 A Second Vindication of the

pose ; that the reader may see how fully the unmasker
has answered it.

Because,, I said " Would any one blame my prudence,
" if I mentioned only those advantages which all chris-
" tians are agreed in ? " the unmasker adds, p. 44, " so-
" cinian Christians : " and then, as if the naming of that
had gained him his point, he goes on victoriously thus :
" He has bethought himself better, since he first pub-
" lished his notions, and (as the result of that) he now
" begins to resolve what he writ into prudence. I
" know whence he had this method, (and it is likely he
" has taken more than this from the same hands,) viz.
" from the missionary Jesuits, that went to preach the
" gospel to the people of China. We are told, that they
" instructed them in some matters relating to our Sa-
" viour ; they let them know that Jesus was the JMes-
" sias, the person promised to be sent into the world :
" but they concealed his sufferings and death, and they
" would not let them know any thing of his passion and
" crucifixion. So our author (their humble imitator)
" undertakes to instruct the world in Christianity, with
" an omission of its principal articles ; and more espe-
" cially that of the advantage we have by Christ's
" death, which was the prime thing designed in his
" coming into the world. This he calls prudence : so
" that to hide from the people the main articles of the
" Christian religion, to disguise the faith of the gospel,
" to betray Christianity itself, is, according to this ex-
" cellent writer, the cardinal virtue of prudence. May
" we be delivered then, say I, from a prudential raco-
" vian." And there ends the rattling for this time; not
to be outdone by any piece of clock-work in the town.
When he is once set a going, he runs on like an alarum,
always in the same strain of noisy, empty declama
tion, (wherein every thing is supposed, and nothing
proved,) till his own weight has brought him to the
ground : and then, being wound up with some new
topic, takes another run, whether it makes for or against
him, it matters not ; he has laid about him with ill lan
guage, let it light where it will, and the vindicator is
paid off.

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 267

That I may keep the due distance in our different
ways of writing, I shall show the reader, that I say not
this at random ; but that the place affords me occasion
to say so. He begins this paragraph with these words,
p. 42, " Let us hear farther, what this vindicator says
" to excuse his rejection of the doctrines contained in
" the epistles." This rejection of the doctrines con
tained in the epistles, was the not mentioning the satis
faction of Christ, amongst those advantages I showed
that the world received by his coming. This appears
by the words he here quotes, as my excuse for that
omission. In which place I also produced some passages
in my book, which sounded like it, some words of scrip
ture, that are used to prove it ; but this will not content
him : I am for all that, a " betrayer of Christianity, and
" contemner of the epistles." Why? because I did
not, out of them, make satisfaction. If you will have
the truth of it, sir, there is not any such word in any
one of the epistles, or other books of the New Testa
ment, in my bible, as satisfying, or satisfaction made
by our Saviour ; and so I could not put it into my
" Christianity as delivered in the Scripture." If mine
be not a true bible, I desire you to furnish me with one
that is more orthodox ; or, if the translators have " hid
" that main article of the Christian religion/' they are
the " betrayers of Christianity, and contemners of the
" epistles," who did not put it there ; and not I who
did not take a word from thence, which they did not
put there. For truly I am not a maker of creeds ; nor
dare add either to the scripture, or to the fundamental
articles of the Christian religion.

But you will say, satisfaction, though not named in
the epistles, yet may plainly be collected out of them.
Answ. And so it may out of several places in my " Rea-
" sonableness of Christianity," some whereof, which I
took out of the gospels, I mentioned in my vindication,
p. 163, 164, and others of them, which I took out of
the epistles, I shall point out to you now : as p. 417, I
say, the design of our Saviour's coming was to be OF
FERED up ; and p. 84, I speak of the work of our RE
DEMPTION : words, which in the epistles, are taken to

£68 A Second Vindication of the

imply satisfaction. And therefore if that be enough, I
see not, but I may be free from betraying Christianity ;
but if it be necessary to name the word Satisfaction, and
he that does not so is a betrayer of Christianity, you will
do well to consider, how you will acquit the holy apos
tles from that bold imputation; which if it be extended
as far as it will go, will scarce come short of blasphemy :
for I do not remember, that our Saviour has any- where
named satisfaction, or implied it plainer in any words,
than those I have quoted from him; and he, I hope,
will escape the intemperance of your tongue.

You tell me, I had my " prudence from the mission-
" ary Jesuits in China, who concealed our Saviour's suf-
" ferings and death, because I undertake to instruct the
" world in Christianity, with an omission of its principal
" articles." And I pray, sir, from whom did you learn
your prudence, when, taking upon you to teach the fun
damental doctrines of Christianity, in your " Thoughts
" concerning the causes of atheism," you left out se
veral, that you have been pleased since to add in your
" Socinianism unmasked? " Or, if I, as you say here,
betray Christianity by this omission of this principal ar
ticle ; what do you, who are a professed teacher of it, if
you omit any principal article, which your prudence is
so wary in, that you will not say you have given us all
that are necessary to salvation, in that list you have last
published ? I pray, who acts best the Jesuit, (whose hum
ble imitator, you say, I am,) you or I ? when, pretending
to give a catalogue of fundamentals, you have not re
duced them to direct propositions, but have left some
of them indefinite, to be collected as every one pleases :
and instead of telling us it is a perfect catalogue of fun
damentals, plainly shuffle it off, and tell me, p. 22, " If
" that will not content me, you are sure you can do no-
" thing that will : if I require more, it is folly in you to
" comply with me ? " One part of what you here say,
I own to you, savours not much of the skill of a Jesuit.
You confess your inability, and I believe it to be per
fectly true : that if what you have done already [which
is nothing at all) " will not content me," you are sure
" you can do nothing that will content me, " or any

Reasonableness of Christianity , 8$c. 269

reasonable man that shall demand of you a complete
catalogue of fundamentals. But you make it up pretty
well, with a confidence becoming one of that order. For
he must have rubbed his forehead hard, who in the same
treatise, where he so severely condemns the imperfection
of my list of fundamentals, confesses that he cannot
give a complete catalogue of his own.

You publish to the world in this 44th, and the next
page, that, " I hide from the people the main articles of
" the Christian religion ; I disguise the faith of the gos-
" pel, betray Christianity itself, and imitate the Jesuits
" that went to preach the gospel to the people of China,
" by my omission of its principal or main articles."

Answ. I know not how I disguise the faith of the
gospel, &c. in imitation of the Jesuits in China ; unless
taking men off from the inventions of men, and recom
mending to them the reading and study of the holy
scripture, to find what the gospel is, and requires, be
" a disguising the faith of the gospel, a betraying of
" Christianity, and imitating the Jesuits." Besides, sir,
if one may ask you, In what school did you learn that
prudent wariness and reserve, which so eminently ap
pears, p. 24, of your " Socinianism unmasked/' in these
words : " These articles" (meaning those which you had
before enumerated as fundamental articles) " of faith,
" are such as must IN SOME MEASURE be known and
" assented to by a Christian, such as must GENERALLY
" be received and embraced by him ? " You will do well
the next time, to set down, how far your fundamentals
must be known, assented to, and received ; to avoid the
suspicion, that there is a little more of Jesuitism in these
expressions, " in some measure known and assented to,
" and generally received and embraced;" than what
becomes a sincere protestant preacher of the gospel.
For your speaking so doubtfully of knowing and assent
ing to those, which you give us for fundamental doc
trines, which belong (as you say) to the very essence
of Christianity, will hardly escape being imputed to your
want of knowledge, or want of sincerity. And indeed,
the word " general," is in familiar use with you, and
stands you in good stead, when you would say some-

270 A Second Vindication of the

thing1, you know not what ; as I shall have occasion to
remark to you, when I come to your 91st page.

Further, I do not remember where it was, that I
mentioned or undertook to set down all the " principal
" or main articles of Christianity." To change the
terms of the question, from articles necessary to be be
lieved to make a man a Christian, into principal or
main articles, looks a little Jesuitical. But to pass by
that : the apostles, when they " went to preach the
" gospel to people," as much strangers to it as the
Chinese were, when the Europeans came first amongst
them, " Did they hide from the people the main arti-
" cles of the Christian religion, disguise the faith of the
" gospel, and betray Christianity itself?" If they did
not, I am sure I have not : for I have not omitted any
of the main articles, which they preached to the unbe
lieving world. Those I have set down, with so much
care, not to omit any of them, that you blame me for it
more than once, and call it tedious. However you are
pleased to acquit or condemn the apostles in the case,
by your supreme determination, I am very indifferent.
If you think fit to condemn them for " disguising or
" betraying the Christian religion," because they said
no more of satisfaction, than I have done, in their
preaching at first, to their unbelieving auditors, jews or
heathens, to make them, as I think, Christians, (for that
I am now speaking of,) I shall not be sorry to be found
in their company, under what censure soever. If you
are pleased graciously to take off this your censure from
them, for this omission, I shall claim a share in the same
indulgence.

But to come to what, perhaps, you will think yourself
a little more concerned not to censure, and what the
apostles did so long since ; for you have given instances
of being very apt to make bold with the dead : pray
tell me, does the church of England admit people into
the church of Christ at hap-hazard ? Or without pro
posing arid requiring a profession of all that is necessary
to be believed to make a man a Christian ? If she does
not, I desire you to turn to the baptism of those of riper
years in our liturgy : where the priest, asking the con-

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 271

vert particularly, whether he believes the apostles creed,,
which he repeats to him ; upon his profession that he
does, and that he desires to be baptized into that faith,
without one word of any other articles, baptizes him ;
and then declares him a Christian in these words : " We
" receive this person into the congregation of Christ's
" flock, and sign him with the sign of the cross, in to-
" ken that he shall not be ashamed — to CONTINUE
" Christ's faithful soldier and servant." In all this
there is not one word of satisfaction, no more than in
my book, nor so much neither. And here I ask you,
Whether for this omission you will pronounce that the
church of England disguises the faith of the gospel?
However you think fit to treat me, yet methinks you
should not let yourself loose so freely against our first
reformers and the fathers of our church ever since, as to
call them " Betrayers of Christianity itself;" because
they think not so much necessary to be believed to
make a man a Christian, as you are pleased to put down
in your articles ; but omit, as well as I, your " main
" article of satisfaction."

Having1 thus notably harangued upon the occasion of
my saying, " Would any one blame my prudence ? " and
thereby make me a " socinian, a Jesuit, and a betrayer of
" Christianity itself," he has in that answered all that
such a miscreant as I do, or can say ; and so passes by
all the reasons I gave for what I did ; without any other
notice or answer, but only denying- a matter of fact,
which I only can know, and he cannot, viz. my design
in printing my " Reasonableness of Christianity/'

In the next paragraph, p. 45, in answer to the words
of St. Paul, Rom. xiv. 1, " Him that is weak in the
" faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations ; "
which I brought as a reason why I mentioned not satis
faction amongst the benefits received by the coming of
our Saviour ; because, as I tell him in my Vindication,
p. 164, " my reasonableness of Christianity,5' as the
title shows, " was designed chiefly for those who were
" not yet thoroughly or firmly Christians." He replies,
and I desire him to prove it,

272 A Second Vindication of the

XX. " That I pretend a design of my book, which
" was never so much as thought of, until I was
" solicited by my brethren to vindicate it."

All the rest in this paragraph, being either nothing
to this place of the Romans, or what I have answered
elsewhere, needs no farther answer.

The riext two paragraphs, p. 46 — 49, are meant for
an answer to something I had said concerning the apos
tles creed, upon the occasion of his charging my book
with socinianism. They begin thus :

This " author of the new Christianity " [Answ. This
new Christianity is as old as the preaching of our Saviour
and his apostles, and a little older than the unmasker's
system] " wisely objects, that the apostles creed hath
" none of those articles which I mention," p. 591, &c.
Answ. If that author wisely objects, the unmasker would
have done well to have replied wisely. But for a man
wisely to reply, it is in the first place requisite that the
objection be truly and fairly set down in its full force,
and not represented short, and as will best serve the
answerer's turn to repJy to. This is neither wise nor
honest : and this first part of a wise reply the unmasker
has failed in. This will appear from my words, and
the occasion of them. The unmasker had accused my
book of socinianism, for omitting some points, which
he urged as necessary articles of faith. To which I
answered, That he had done so only, " to give it an ill
" name, not because it was socinian ; for he had no
" more reason to charge it with socinianism, for the
" omissions he mentions, than the apostles creed."
These are my words, which he should have either set
down out of p. 67? which he quotes, or at least given
the objection, as I put it, if he had meant to have cleared
it by a fair answer. But he, instead thereof, contents
himself that " I object that the apostles creed hath
" none of those articles and doctrines which the im-
" masker mentioned." Answ. This at best is but a
part of my objection, and not to the purpose which I
there meant, without the rest joined to it ; which it has

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 273

pleased the un masker, according to his laudable Way, to
conceal. My objection, therefore, stands thus :

That the same articles, for the omission whereof the
unmasker charges my book with socinianism, being
also omitted in the apostles creed, he has no more
reason to charge my book with socinianism, for the
omissions mentioned, than he hath to charge the
apostles creed with socinianism.

To this objection of mine, let us now see how he an-
swers, p. 47.

" Nor does any considerate man wonder at it,"
[i. e. that the apostles creed had none of those articles
and doctrines which he had mentioned,] " for the creed
" is a form of outward profession, which is chiefly to be
•" made in the public assemblies, when prayers are put
" up in the church, and the holy scriptures are read :
" then this abridgment of faith is properly used, or when
" there is not time or opportunity to make any enlarge-
" ment. But we are not to think it expressly con-
" tains in it all the necessary and weighty points, all
" the important doctrines of belief; it being only de-
" signed to be an abstract."

Answ. Another indispensable requisite in a wise re
ply is, that it should be pertinent. Now what can there
be more impertinent, than to confess the matter of fact
upon which the objection is grounded ; but instead of
destroying the inference drawn from that matter of fact,
only amuse the reader with wrong reasons, why that
matter of fact was so ?

No considerate man, he says, doth wonder, that the
articles and doctrines he mentioned, are omitted in the
apostles creed : because " that creed is a form of out-
" ward profession." Answ. A profession ! of what, I
beseech you ? Is it a form to be used for form's sake ? I
thought it had been a profession of something, even of
the Christian faith : and if it be so, any considerate man
may wonder necessary articles of the Christian faith
should be left out of it. For how it can be an outward

T

A Second Vindication of the

profession of the Christian faith, without containing the
Christian faith, I do not see ; unless a man can out
wardly profess the Christian faith in words, that do not
contain or express it, i. e. profess the Christian faith,
when he does not profess it. But he says, " It is a pro-
" fession chiefly to be made use of in assemblies."
Answ. Do those solemn assemblies privilege it from
containing the necessary articles of the Christian reli
gion ? This proves not that it does not, or was not de
signed to contain all the articles necessary to be believed
to make a man a Christian ; unless the un masker can
prove that a " form of outward profession" of the Chris
tian faith, that contains all such necessary articles, can
not be made use of, in the public assemblies. " In the
" public assemblies," says he, " when prayers are put
" up by the church, and the holy scriptures are read,
" then this abridgment of faith is properly used ; or
" when there is not generally time or opportunity to
" make an enlargement." Answ. But that which con
tains not what is absolutely necessary to be believed to
make a man a Christian, can no-where be properly used
as a form of outward profession of the. Christian faith,
and least of all, in the solemn public assemblies. All
the sense I can make of this is, that this abridgment of
the Christian faith, i. e. imperfect collection (as the un-
masker will have it) of some of the fundamental articles
of Christianity in the apostles creed, which omits the
greatest part of them, is made use of as a form of out
ward profession of but part of the Christian faith in the
public assemblies ; when, by reason of reading of the
scripture and prayers, there is not time or opportunity
for a full and perfect profession of it.

It is strange the Christian church should not find time
nor opportunity, in sixteen hundred years, to make, in
any of her public assemblies, a profession of so much of
her faith, as is necessary to make a man a Christian. But
pray tell me, has the church any such full and complete
form of faith, that hath in it all those propositions, you
have given us for necessary articles, (not to say any
thing of those which you have reserved to yourself, in
your own breast, and will not communicate,) of which

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c.

the apostles creed is only a scanty form, a brief imper
fect abstract, used only to save time in the crowd of
other pressing occasions, that are always in haste to be
dispatched ? If she has, the unmasker will do well to
produce it. If the church has no such complete form,
besides the apostles creed, any-where, of fundamental
articles ; he will do well to leave talking idly of this ab
stract, as he goes on to do in the following words :

" But," says he, " we are not to think that it expressly
" contains in it all the necessary and weighty points,
" all the important doctrines of our belief; it being only
" designed to be an abstract." Answ. Of what, I be
seech you, is it an abstract ? For here the unmasker stops
short, and, as one that knows not well what to say,
speaks not out what it is an abstract of; but provides
himself a subterfuge in the generality of the preceding
terms, of " necessary and weighty points, and impor-
" tant doctrines," jumbled together; which can be
there of no other use, but to cover his ignorance or so
phistry. But the question being only about necessary
points, to what purpose are weighty and important doc
trines joined to them ; unless he will say, that there is
no difference between necessary and weighty points,
fundamental and important doctrines ; and if so, then
the distinction of points into necessary and not neces
sary, will be foolish and impertinent ; and all the doc
trines contained in the bible, will be absolutely neces
sary to be explicitly believed by every man to make him
a Christian. But taking it for granted, that the distinc
tion of truths contained in the gospel, into points abso
lutely necessary, and not absolutely necessary, to be
believed to make a man a Christian, is good ; I desire
the unmasker to tell us, what the apostles creed is an
abstract of? He will, perhaps, answer, that he has told
us already in this very page, where he says,, it is an
abridgment of faith : and he has said true in words, but
saying those words by rote, after others, without under
standing them, he has said so in a sense that is not true.
For he supposes it an abridgment of faith, by containing
only a few of the necessary articles of faith, and leaving
out the far greater part of them ; and so takes a part of a

T 2

276 A Second Vindication of the

thing- for an abridgment of it ; whereas an abridgment
or abstract of any thing, is the whole in little ; and if it
be of a science or doctrine, the abridgment consists in
the essential or necessary parts of it contracted into a
narrower compass than where it lies diffused in the or
dinary way of delivery, amongst a great number of tran
sitions, explanations, illustrations, proofs, reasonings,
corollaries, &c. All which, though they make a part
of the discourse, wherein that doctrine is delivered, are
left out in the abridgment of it, wherein all the necessary
parts of it are drawn together into a less room. But
though an abridgment need to contain none but the
essential and necessary parts, yet all those it ought to
contain ; or else it will not be an abridgment or abstract
of that thing, but an abridgment only of a part of it.
I think it could not be said to be an abridgment of the
law contained in an act of parliament, wherein any of
the things required by that act were omitted ; which yet
commonly may be reduced into a very narrow compass,
Avhen stripped of all the motives, ends, enacting forms,
&c. expressed in the act itself. If this does not satisfy
the unmasker what is properly an abridgment, I shall
refer him to Mr. Chillingworth, who, I think, will be
allowed to- understand sense, and to speak it properly,
at least as well as the unmasker. And what he says hap
pens to be in the very same question, between Knot, the
Jesuit, and him, that is here between the unmasker and
me : it is but putting the unmasker in the Jesuit's place,
and myself (if it may be allowed me, without vanity) in
Mr. Chillingworth, the protestant's ; and Mr. Chilling-
worth's very words, chap. iv. § 65, will exactly serve
for my answer : " You trifle affectedly, confounding the
" apostles belief of the whole religion of Christ, as it
" comprehends both what we are to do, and what we
" are to believe, with that part of it which contains not
" duties of obedience, but only the necessary articles of
" simple faith. Now, though the apostles belief be, in
" the former sense, a larger thing than that which we
" call the apostles creed : yet, in the latter sense of the
" word, the creed (I say) is a full comprehension of
*' their belief, which you yourself have formerly con-

Reasonableness of Christianity, &$C. 277

" fessed, though somewhat fearfully and inconsistently.
" And here again, unwillingness to speak the truth
" makes you speak that which is hardly sense, and call
" it an abridgment of some articles of faith. For I
" demand, those some articles which you speak of,
" which are they ? Those that are out of the creed, or
" those that are in it ? Those that are in it, it compre-
" hends at large, and therefore it is not an abridgment
" of them. Those that are out of it, it comprehends
" not at all, and therefore it is not an abridgment of
" them. If you would call it now an abridgment of
" faith ; this would be sense ; and signify thus much,
" that all the necessary articles of the Christian faith are
" comprized in it. For this is the proper duty of
" abridgments, to leave out nothing necessary." So
that in Mr. Chilling worth's judgment of an abridg
ment, it is not sense to say, as you do, p. 47, That
" we are not to think, that the apostles creed expressly
" contains in it all the necessary points of our belief, it
" being only designed to be an abstract, or an abridg-
" mcnt of faith :" but on the contrary, we must con
clude, it contains in it all the necessary articles of faith,
for that very reason ; because it is an abridgment of
faith, as the unmasker calls it. But whether this that
Mr. Chillingworth has given us here, be the nature of an
abridgment or no ; this is certain, that the apostles
creed cannot be a form of profession of the Christian
faith, if any part of the faith necessary to make a man
a Christian, be left out of it : and yet such a profession
of faith would the unmasker have this abridgment of
faith to be. For a little lower, in the 47th page, he
says in express terms, That " if a man believe no more
" than is, in express terms, in the apostles creed, his
" faith will not be the faith of a Christian." Where
in he does great honour to the primitive church,
and particularly to the church of England. The primi
tive church admitted converted heathens to baptism,
upon the faith contained in the apostles creed : a bare
profession of that faith, and no more, was required of
them to be received into the church, and made mem-

278 A Second Vindication of the

bers of Christ's body. How little different the faith of
the ancient church was, from the faith I have men
tioned, may be seen in these words of Tertullian :
" Regula fidei una omnino est, sola, immobilis, irre-
" formabilis, credendi, scilicet, in unicimi Deum omni-
" potentem, rnundi conditorem, & filium ejus Jesum
" Christum, natum ex virgine, Maria, crucifixum sub
" Pontio Pilato, tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis, re-
" ceptum in coelis, sedentem nunc ad dextram Patris,
" venturum judicare vivos & mortuos, per carnis etiam
" resurrectioriem. Hac lege fidei manente, csetera jam
" discipline & conversationis admittunt novitatein cor-
" rectionis :" Tert. de virg. velan. in principio. This
was the faith, that in Tertullian's time sufficed to make
a Christian. And the church of England, as I have re
marked already, only proposed the articles of the apostles
creed to the convert to be baptized ; and upon his pro
fessing a belief of them, asks, Whether he will be bap
tized in this faith ; which (if we will believe the un-
niasker) " is not the faith of a Christian/' However,
the church, without any more ado, upon the profession
of this faith, and no other, baptizes him into it. So
that the ancient church, if the umnasker may be be
lieved, baptized converts into that faith, which " is
" not the faith of a Christian." And the church of
England, when she baptizes any one, makes him not a
Christian. For he that is baptized only into a faith,
that " is not the faith of a Christian," I would fain
know how he can thereby be made a Christian ? So that
if the omissions, which he so much blames in my book,
make me a socinian, I see not how the church of Eng
land will escape that censure ; since those omissions are
in that very confession of faith which she proposes, and
upon a profession whereof, she baptizes those whom she
designs to make Christians. But it seems that the un-
inasker (who has made bold to unmask her too) reasons
right, that the church of England is mistaken, and
makes none but socinians Christians ; or (as he is pleased
now to declare) no Christians at all. Which, if true,
the unmasker had best look to it, whether he himself be

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c.

a Christian, or no ; for it is to be feared, he was bap
tized only into that faith, which he himself confesses
" is not the faith of a Christian."

But he brings himself off, in these following words :
" all matters of faith, in some manner, may be reduced
" to this brief platform of belief." Answ. If that be
enough to make him a true and an orthodox Christian,
he does not consider whom, in this way, he brings off
with him ; for I think 'he cannot deny, that all matters
of faith, in some manner, may be reduced to that ab
stract of faith which I have given, as well as to that brief
platform in the apostles creed. So that, for aught I see,
by this rule, we are Christians or not Christians, ortho
dox or not orthodox, equally together.

But yet he says, in the next words ; when he calls it an
" abstract, or abbreviature, it is implied, that there are
" more truths to be known and assented to by a Christian,
" in order to making him really so, than what we meet
" with here." The quite contrary whereof (as has been
shown) is implied, by its being called an abstract. But
what is that to the purpose ? It is not fit abstracts and
abbreviatures should stand in an unmasker's way. They
are sounds men have used for what they pleased ; and
why may not the unmasker do so too, and use them in a
sense, that may make the apostles creed be only a broken
scrap of the Christian faith ? However, in great conde^
scension, being willing to do the apostles creed what
honour he could, he says, That " all matters of faith,
" in some manner, may be reduced to this brief plat-
" form of belief." But yet, when it is set in competi
tion with the creed, which he himself is making, (for it
is not yet finished,) it is by no means to be allowed as
sufficient to make a man a Christian : " There are more
" truths to be known and assented to, in order to make
" a man really a Christian." Which, what they are,
the church of England shall know, when this new re
former thinks fit ; and then she may be able to propose
to those who are not yet so, a collection of articles of
belief, and baptize them a-new into a faith, which will
really make them Christians : but hitherto, if the un
masker may be credited, she has failed in it.

280 A Second Vindication of the

(i Yet he craves leave to tell me," in the following
words, p. 48, " That the apostles creed hath more in it
" than I, or my brethren, will subscribe to." Were it
not the undoubted privilege of the unmasker to know
me better than I do myself, (for he is always telling me
something of myself, which I did not know,) I would,
in my turn, crave leave to tell him, that this is the faith
I was baptized into, no one tittle whereof I have re
nounced, that I know ; and that I heretofore thought,
that gave me title to be a Christian. But the unmasker
hath otherwise determined : and I know not now where
to find a Christian. For the belief of the apostles creed
will not, it seems, make a man one : and what other
belief will, it does not yet please the unmasker to tell us.
But yet, as to the subscribing to the apostles creed, I
must take leave to say, however the unmasker may be
right in the faith, he is out in the morals of a Christian ;
it being against the charity of one, that is really so, to
pronounce, as he does, peremptorily in a thing that he
cannot know ; and to affirm positively what I know to
be a downright falsehood. But what others will do, it
is not my talent to determine ; that belongs to the un
masker ; though, as to all that are my brethren in the
Christian faith, I may answer for them too, that they will
also with me, do that, without which, in that sense,
they cannot be my brethren.

Page 49, The unmasker smartly convinces me of no
small blunder, in these words : " But was it not judi-
" ciously said by this writer, that, " it is well for the
" compilers of the creed, that they lived not in my
" days?" P. 12, " I tell you, friend, it was impossible
" they should ; for the learned Usher and Vossius, and
" others have proved, that that symbol was drawn up,
" not at once, but that some articles of it were adjoined
" many years after, far beyond the extent of any man's
" life ; and therefore the compilers of the creed could
" not live in my days, nor could I live in theirs." Answ.
But it seems that, had they lived all together, you could
have lived in their days. " But/' says he, " I let this
" pass, as one of the blunders of our thoughtful and
" musing author." Answ. And I tell you, friend, that

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc.

unless it were to show your reading in Usher and Vossius,
you had better have let this blunder of mine alone.
Does not the unmasker here give a clear proof, that he
is no changeling ? Whatever argument he takes in hand,
weighty or trivial, material or not material to the thing
in question, he brings it to the same sort of sense and
force. He would show me guilty of an absurdity, in
saying, " It is well for the compilers of the creed, that
" they lived not in his days." This he proves to be a
blunder, because they all lived not in one another's
days ; therefore it was an absurdity to suppose, they
might all live in his days. As if there were any greater
absurdity to bring the compilers, who lived, possibly,
within a few centuries of one another, by a supposition,
into one time ; than it is to bring the unmasker, and
any one of them who lived a thousand years distant one
from another, by a supposition, to be contemporaries;
for it is by reason of the compilers living at a distance
one from another, that he proves it impossible for him
to be their contemporary. As if it were not as im
possible in fact, for him who was not born until above a
thousand years after, to live in any of their days, as it is
for any one of them to live in either of those compilers
days, that died before him. The supposition of their liv
ing together, is as easy of one as the other, at what dis
tance soever they lived, and how many soever there were
of them. This being so, I think it had been better for
the unmasker to have let alone the blunder, and showed
(which was his business) that he does not accuse the
compilers of the creed of being all over socinianized, as
well as he does me, since they were as guilty as I, of
the omission of those articles, (viz. " that Christ is the
" word of God : that Christ was God incarnate : the
" eternal and ineffable generation of the Son of God :
" that the Son is in the Father, and the Father in the
" Son, which expresses their unity ;") for the omission
whereof, the unmasker laid socinianism to my charge.
So that it remains still upon his score to show,

XXI. " Why these omissions in the apostles creed do
" not as well make that abstract, as my abridgment
" of faith, to be socinian ?"

A Second Vindication of the

Page 57, The unmasker " desires the reader to ob-
" serve, that this lank faith of mine is in a manner no
" other than the faith of a Turk." And I desire the
reader to observe, that this faith of mine was all that
our Saviour and his apostles preached to the unbelieving
world. And this our unmasker cannot deny, as I think,
will appear to any one, who observes what he says, p. 76,
77, of his Socinianism unmasked. And that they preach
ed nothing but " a faith, that was in a manner no other
" than the faitli of a Turk," I think none amongst chris-
tians, but this bold unmasker, will have the irreverancc
profanely to say.

He tells us, p. 54, that " the musselmen" (or, as he
has, for the information of his reader, very pertinently
proved, it should be writ, moslemim ; without which,
perhaps, we should not have known his skill in Arabic,
or, in plain English, the mahometans) " believe that
" Christ is a good man, and not above the nature of a
" man, and sent of God to give instruction to the
" world : and my faith," he says, " is of the very same
" scantling." This I shall desire him to prove ; or,
which in other words he insinuates in this and the
neighbouring pages, viz.

XXII. That that faith, which I have affirmed to be
the faith, which is required to make a man a Chris
tian, is no other than what Turks believe, and is
contained in the alcoran.

Or, as he expresses it himself, p. 55,

" That a Turk, according to me, is a Christian ; for I
" make the same faith serve them both."

And particularly to show where it is I say,

XXIII. That " Christ is not above the nature of a
" man," or have made that a necessary article of
the Christian faith.

And next, where it is,

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 283

XXIV. " That I speak as meanly of Christ's suffer-
" ing on the cross, and death, as if there were no
" such thing."

For thus he says of me., p. 54, cc I seem to have con-
" suited the mahometan bible, which did say, Christ
" did not suffer on the cross, did not die. For I, and
" my allies, speak as meanly of these articles, as if there
" were no such thing."

To show our un masker's veracity in this case, I shall
trouble my reader with some passages out of my " Rea-
" sonableness of Christianity," p. 35 : " When we con-
" sider, that he was to fill out the time foretold of his
" ministry, and after a life illustrious in miracles and
" good works, attended with humility, meekness, pa-
" tience, and suffering, and every way conformable to
" the prophecies of him, should be led as a sheep to the
" slaughter, and, with all quiet and submission, be
" brought to the cross,, though there were no guilt or
" fault found in him." And, p. 42, " contrary to the
" design of his coming, which was to be offered up a
" lamb, blameless and void of offence." And, p. 63,
" laying down his life, both for jews and gentiles."
P. 96, " given up to contempt, torment, and death."
But, say what I will, when the immasker thinks fit to
have it so, it is speaking out of the mahometan bible,
that " Christ did not suffer on the cross, did not die ;
" or at least, is speaking as meanly of these articles, as
" if no such thing had been."

His next slander is, p. 55, in these words : " this
" gentleman presents the world with a very ill notion
" of faith ; for the very devils are capable of all that
" faith, which, he says, makes a Christian." It is not
strange, that the immasker should misrepresent the
faith, which, I say, makes a Christian ; when it seems
to be his whole design to misrepresent my meaning
every-where. The frequency of his doing it, I have
showed in abundance of instances, to which I shall add
an eminent one here ; which shows what a fair cham
pion he is for truth and religion.

£84 A Second Vindication of the

Page 104, of my " Reasonableness of Christianity," I
give this account of the faith which makes a Christian ;
that it is " men's entering themselves in the kingdom
" of God ; owning and professing themselves the sub-
" jects of Jesus, whom they believe to be the Messiah,
" and receive for their Lord and Kin^ : for that was to

o

" be baptized in his name." This sense of believing
Christ to be the Messiah, that is, to take him for our
King and Lord, who is to be obeyed, I have expressed
over and over again; as, p. 110, 111, my words are,
66 that as many of them as would believe Jesus the son
t( of God (whom he sent into the world) to be the Mes-
" siah, the promised Deliverer, and would receive him
" for their king and ruler, should have all their past sins,
" disobedience, and rebellion, forgiven them. And if,
" for the future, they lived in sincere obedience to his
" law, to the utmost of their power, the sins of human
" frailty for the time to come, as well as those of their
" past lives, should for his son's sake, because they gave
" themselves up to him to be his subjects, be forgiven
" them : and so their faith, which made them to be
" baptized into his name, (i. e. inroll themselves in the
" kingdom of Jesus, the Messiah, and profess themselves
" his subjects, and consequently live by the laws of his
" kingdom,) should be accounted to them for righte-
" ousness." Which account of what is necessary, I
close with these words : " this is the faith for which
" God of his free grace justifies sinful man." And is
this the faith of devils ?

To the same purpose, p. 113, are these words : " the
" chief end of his coming was to be a king; and, as
" such, to be received by those who would be his subjects
" in the kingdom which he came to erect." And again,
p. 112, " only those who have believed Jesus to be the
" Messiah, and taken him for their king, with a sincere
" endeavour after righteousness in obeying his law, shall
" have their past sins not imputed to them." And so
again p. 113 and 120, and in several other places; of
which I shall add but this one more, p. 120, " it is not
" enough to believe him to be the Messiah, unless we
" obey his laws, and take him to be our king to reign

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 285

" over us." Can the devils thus believe him to be the
Messiah ? Yet this is that, which, by these and abun
dance of other places, I have showed to be the meaning
of believing him to be the Messiah.

Besides, I have expressly distinguished the faith which
makes a Christian, from that which the devils have, by
proving, that, to the believing Jesus to be the Messiah,,
must be joined repentance, or else it will not make them
true Christians : and what this repentance is, may be
seen at large in p. 105, &c. some expressions whereof I
shall here set down; as p. 105, " repentance does not
" consist in one single act of sorrow, (though that being
" first, and leading, gives denomination to the whole,)
" but in doing works meet for repentance ; in a sincere
" obedience to the law of Christ, the remainder of our
" lives." Again ; to distinguish the faith of a Christian
from that of devils, I say expressly, out of St. Paul's
epistle to the Galatians, " that which availeth is faith,
" but faith working by love ; and that faith, without
" works, i. e. the works of sincere obedience to the law
" and will of Christ, is not sufficient for our justifica-
" tion." And, p. 117, "That to inherit eternal life,
" we must love the Lord our God, with all our heart,
" with all our soul, with all our strength, and with all
" our mind." And p. 121, " Love Christ, in keeping
" his commandments."

This, and a great deal more to this purpose, may be
seen in my " Reasonableness of Christianity ;" particu
larly, where I answer that objection, about the faith of
devils, which I made in p. 102, &c. and therein at large
show, wherein the faith of devils comes short of the
justifying faith, which makes a Christian. And yet the
good, the sincere, the candid un masker, with his be
coming confidence, tells his readers here, p. 55, " That
" I present the world with a very ill notion of faith: for
" the very devils are capable of all that faith, which I
" say, makes a Christian man."

To prevent this calumny, I, in more places than one,
distinguished between faith, in a strict sense, as it is a
bare assent to any proposition, and that which is called
evangelical faith, in a larger sense of the word ; which

286 A Second Vindication of the

comprehends under it something more than a bare simple
assent ; as, p. 26, " I mean, this is all that is required
" to he believed by those who acknowledge but one
66 eternal, invisible God, the maker of heaven and earth:
" for that there is something more required to salvation,
" besides believing, we shall see hereafter." P. 28,
66 All I say that was to be believed for justification.
(i For that this was not all that was required to be
" done for justification, we shall see hereafter." P. 51 ,
" Obeying the law of the Messiah, their king, being no
" less required, than their believing that Jesus was the
" Messiah, the King arid Deliverer, that was promised
" them." P. 102, " As far as their believing could
" make them members of Christ's body." By these,
and more, the like passages in my book, my meaning is
so evident, that no-body, but an un masker, would have
said, that when I spoke of believing, as a bare specula
tive assent to any proposition, as true, I affirmed that
was all that was required of a Christian for justification :
though that in the strict sense of the word, is all that is
done in believing. An'd therefore, I say, As far as
mere believing could make them members of Christ's
body ; plainly signifying, as much as words can, that
the faith, for which they were justified, included some
thing more than a bare assent. This appears, not only
from these words of mine, p. 104, " St. Paul often, in his
" epistles, puts faith for the whole duty of a Christian :"
but from my so often, and almost every-where, inter
preting " believing him to be the Messiah, by taking
" him to be our King," whereby is meant not a bare
idle speculation, a bare notional persuasion of any truth
whatsoever, floating in our brains ; but an active prin
ciple of life, a faith working by love and obedience.
" To make him to be our King," carries with it a right
disposition of the will to honour and obey him, joined
to that assent wherewith believers embrace this funda
mental truth, that Jesus was the person who was by God
sent to be their King ; he that was promised to be their
Prince and Saviour.

But,, for all this, the unmasker, p. 56, confidently
tells his reader, that I say no such thing. His words

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 287

are : " But besides this historical faith, (as it is gene-
" rally called by divines,) which is giving credit to
" evangelical truths, is barely revealed, there must be
" something else added to make up the true substantial
" faith of a Christian. With the assent of the under-
" standing, must be joined the consent or approbation
" of the will. All those divine truths which the in-
" tellect assents to, must be allowed of by this elective
" power of the soul. True evangelical faith is a hearty
" acceptation of the Messias, as he is offered in the
" gospel. It is a sincere and impartial submission to
" all things required by the evangelical law, which is
" contained in the epistles, as well as the other writings.
« And to this practical assent and choice, there must be
" added, likewise, a firm trust and reliance in the blessed
" author of our salvation. But this late undertaker,
" who attempted to give us a more perfect account,
" than ever was before of Christianity, as it is delivered
" in the scriptures, brings us no tidings of any such
" faith belonging to Christianity, or discovered to us in
" the scriptures. Which gives us to understand, that
" he verily believes there is no such Christian faith ; for
" in some of his numerous pages, (especially p. 101,
" &c.) where he speaks so much of belief and faith, he
" might have taken occasion to insert one word about
" his complete faith of the gospel."

Though the places above quoted, out of my " Rea-
" sonableness of Christianity/' and the whole tenour of
the latter part of it, show the falsehood of what the un-
masker here says ; yet I will set down one passage more
out of it ; and then ask our unmasker, when he hath
read them, Whether he hath the brow to say again, that
" I bring no tidings of any such faith ?" My words are,
" Reasonableness of Christianity," p. 129, " Faith in the
" promises of God, relying and acquiescing in his
" word and faithfulness, the Almighty takes well at our
" hands as a great mark of homage paid by us, poor
" frail creatures, to his goodness and truth, as well as
" to his power and wisdom ; and accepts it as an ac-
" knowledgment of his peculiar providence and benig-
" nity to us. And, therefore, our Saviour tells us,

288 A Second Vindication of the

" John xii. 44, " He that believes on me, believes
" not on me, but on him that sent me." The works
" of nature show his wisdom and power : but it is his
" peculiar care of mankind, most eminently discovered
" in his promises to them, that shows his bounty and
" goodness ; and consequently engages their hearts in
" love and affection to him. This oblation of an heart
" fixed with dependance and affection on him, is the
" most acceptable tribute we can pay him, the founda-
" tion of true devotion, and life of all religion. What
" a value he puts on this depending on his word, and
" resting satisfied on his promises, we have an example
" in Abraham; whose faith was counted to him for
" righteousness, as we have before remarked out of
" Rom. iv. And his relying firmly on the promise of
" God, without any doubt of its performance, gave him
" the name of the father of the faithful ; and gained him
" so much favour with the Almighty, that he was called
" the friend of God, the highest and most glorious title
" that can be bestowed on a creature !"

The great out-cry he makes against me in his two
next sections, p. 57 — 60, as if I intended to intro
duce ignorance and popery, is to be entertained rather
as the noise of a petulant scold, saying the worst things
she could think of, than as the arguing of a man of
sense or sincerity. All this mighty accusation is
grounded upon these falsehoods : That " I make it my
" great business to beat men off from divine truths ;
" that I cry down all articles of the Christian faith, but
" one ; that I will not suffer men to look into chris-
" tianity ; that I blast the epistolary writings." I shall
add no more to what I have already said, about the
epistles, but those few words out of my " Reasonable-
" ness of Christianity," page 1545 " The epistles, re-
" solving doubts, and reforming mistakes, are of great
" advantage to our knowledge and practice." And,
p. 155, 156, " An explicit belief of what God requires
" of those, who will enter into, and receive the bene-
" fits of the new covenant, is absolutely required. The
" other parts of divine revelation are objects of faith,
" and are so to be received. They are truths, whereof

Reasonableness of Christianity) fyc. 289

" none, that is once known to be such, i. e. of divine
" revelation,] may, or ought to be disbelieved."

And as for that other saying of his, " That I will
" not suffer men to look into Christianity:" I desire to
know where that Christianity is locked up, which " I
" will not suffer men to look into." My Christianity,
I confess, is contained in the written word of God ;
and that I am so far from hindering any one to look
into, that I every-where appeal to it, and have quoted
so much of it, that the unmasker complains of being
overlaid with it, and tells me it is tedious. " All di-
" vine revelation, I say, p. 156, requires the obedience
** of faith ; and that every one is to receive all the
" parts of it, with a docility and disposition prepared
" to embrace and assent to all truths coming from God ;
" and submit his mind to whatever shall appear to him
" to bear that character.5' I speak, in the same page,
of men's endeavouring to understand it, and of their
interpreting one place by another. This, and the
whole design of my book, shows that I think it every
Christian's duty to read, search and study the holy
scriptures : and make this their great business : and yet
the good unmasker, in a fit of zeal, displays his throat,
and cries out, p. 59, " Hear, O ye heavens, and give
" ear, O earth ; judge whether this be not the way to
" introduce darkness and ignorance into Christendom ;
" whether this be not blinding of men's eyes/' &c.
for this mighty pathos ends not there. And all things
considered, I know not whether he had not reason, in
his want of arguments, this way to pour out his con
cern. For neither the preaching of our Saviour and
his apostles, nor the apostles creed, nor any thing else,
being with him the faith of a Christian, i. e. sufficient to
make a Christian, but just his set of fundamental articles,
(when he himself knows what they be;) in fine, nothing
being Christianity but just his system, it is time to cry
out, Help, neighbours ! hold fast, friends ! Knowledge,
religion, Christianity is gone, if this be once permitted,
that the people should read and understand the scrip
ture for themselves, as God shall enlighten their under
standings in the use of the means ; and not be forced

u

290 A Second Vindication of the

to depend upon me, and upon my choosing1, and my
interpretation, for the necessary points they are to be
lieve to make them Christians : if I, the great un masker,
have not the sole 'power to decree what is, or is not
fundamental, and people he not bound to receive it for
such, faith and the gospel are given up ; darkness and
barbarism will be brought in upon us by this writer's
contrivance. For " he is an underhand factor for that
" communion, which cries up ignorance for the mo-
" ther of devotion and religion :" i. e. in plain Eng
lish, for popery. For to this, and nothing else, tends
all that sputter he makes in the section before men
tioned.

I do not think there was ever a more thorough-paced
declaimer, than our un masker. He leaves out nothing
that he thinks will make an affrighting noise in the ears
of his orthodox hearers, though all the blame and cen
sure he pours out upon others light only on himself.
For let me ask this zealous upholder of light and know
ledge : does he think it reasonable, that any one, who
is not a Christian, should be suffered to be undisturbed
in his parish ? Nay, does he think fit that any such
should live free from the lash of the magistrate, or from
the persecution of the ecclesiastical power ? He seems
to talk with another air, p. 65. In the next place I
ask, Whether any one is a Christian, who has not the
faith of a Christian ? Thirdly, I ask, Whether he has the
faith of a Christian, who does not explicitly believe all
the fundamental articles of Christianity ? And to con
clude, I ask him, Whether all those that he has set
down, are not fundamental necessary articles ? When
the unmasker has fairly answered these questions, it
will be seen who is for popery, and the ignorance and
tyranny that accompany it.

The unmasker is for making and imposing articles of
faith ; but he is for this power in himself. He likes
not popery (which is nothing but the tyranny and im
posing upon men's under standings, faith and con
sciences) in the hands of the old gentleman at Home :
but it would, he thinks, do admirably well in his own
hands. And who can blame him for it? Would not

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 291

that be an excellent way to propagate light and know
ledge, by tying up all men to a bundle of articles of
his own culling ? Or rather, to the authority of Christ
and his apostles residing in him ? For he does not, nor
ever will, give us a full view of fundamentals of his
Christianity : but like the church of Rome, to secure
our dependence, reserves to himself a power of declaring
others, and defining what is matter of faith as he shall
see occasion.

Now, therefore, veil your bonnets to the unmasker,
all you that have a mind to be Christians : break not
your heads about the scriptures, to examine what they
require of you : submit your faith implicitly to the un
masker ; he will understand and find out the necessary
points for you to believe. Take them, just so many as
he thinks fit to deliver them to you ; this is the way to
be knowing Christians. But be sure, ask not, Whether
those he is pleased to deliver, be every one of them fun
damental, and all the fundamental articles, necessary to
be believed to make a man a Christian ? Such a capricious
question spoils all, overturns Christianity, which is in
trusted to the urimasker's sole keeping, to be dispensed
out as he thinks fit. If you refuse an implicit faith to
him, he will presently find you have it for the whore of
Babylon ; he will smell out popery in it immediately :
for he has a very shrewd scent, and you will be dis
covered to be an underhand factor for the church of
Rome.

But if the unmasker were such an enemy, as he pre
tends, to those factors, I wonder he should, in what he
has said concerning the apostles creed, so exactly jump
with Knot the Jesuit. If any one doubt of this, I desire
him to look into the fourth chapter of " Knot's charity
" maintained," and there he will see how well our un
masker and that Jesuit agree in argument ; nay, and ex
pressions too. But yet I do not think him so far guilty,
as to be employed as an underhand factor for popery.
Every body will, I suppose, be ready to pronounce him
so far an innocent, as to clear him from that. The
cunning of this design goes not beyond the laying out
of his preaching oratory, for the setting up his own,

u 2

292 A Second Vindication of the

system, and making that the sole Christianity. To that
end, he would be glad to have the power of interpret
ing scripture, of defining and declaring articles of faith _,
and imposing them. This, which makes the absolute
power of the pope, he would not, I think, establish at
Rome ; but it is plain he would have it himself if he
could get it, for the support of the Christianity of his
system. An implicit faith, if he might have the ma
nagement of it, and the taking fundamentals upon
trust from his authority, would be of excellent use.
Such a power, in his hands, would spread truth and
knowledge in the world, i. e. his own orthodoxy and
set of opinions. But if a man differs, nay, questions
any thing of that, whether it be absolutely necessary to
make one a Christian, it is immediately a contrivance
to let in popery, and to bring " darkness and barbarism
" into the Christian world." But I must tell the inno
cent un masker, whether he designs or no, that if his
calling his system the only Christianity, can bring the
world to receive from him articles of faith of his own
choosing, as fundamentals necessary to be believed by
all men to make them Christians, which Christ and his
apostles did not propose to all men to make them chris-
tians ; he does only set up popery in another guise, and
lay the foundations of ignorance, darkness, and barba
rism, in the Christian world ; for all the ignorance and
blindness, that popery introduced, was only upon this
foundation. And if he does not see this, (as there is
reason to excuse his innocence,) it would be no hard
matter to demonstrate it, if that were at present the
question between us. But there are a great many other
propositions to be proved by him, before we come to
that new matter of debate.

But before I quit these paragraphs, I must go on
with our unmasker's account, and desire him to show
where it is,

XXV. " That I make it my business to beat men off
" from taking notice of any divine truths?"

Next, where it is,

Reasonableness of Christianity, <fyc. 293

XXVI. That " I cry down all articles of Christian
" faith but one?"

Next, how it appears,

XXVII. That « I will not suffer mankind to look
" into Christianity ?"

Again, where it is,

XXVIII. That " I labour industriously to keep peo-
" pie in ignorance ;" or tell them, that " there is
" no necessity of knowing any other doctrines of
" the bible?"

These, and several others of the like strain, particu
larly concerning one article, and the epistles, (which
are his common-places,) are to be found in his 59th and
60th pages. And ail this out of a presumption, that his
system is the only Christianity ; and that if men were
not pressed and persuaded to receive that, just every
article of it, upon pain of damnation, Christianity
would be lost : and not to do this, is to promote igno
rance, and contemn the bible. But he fears where no
fear is. If his orthodoxy be the truth, and conform
able to the scriptures, the laying the foundation only
where our Saviour and his Apostles have laid it, will
not overturn it. And to show him, that it is so, I desire
him again to consider what I said in my Vindication,
p. 164, 165, which, because I do not remember he any
where takes notice of, in his reply, I will here offer again
to his consideration : " Convince but men of the mis-
" sion of Jesus Christ ; make them but see the truth,
" simplicity and reasonableness of what he himself
" hath taught, and required to be believed by his fol-
" lowers ; and you need not doubt, but being once
" fully persuaded of his doctrine, and the advantages
" which, all Christians agree, are received by him, such
" converts will not lay by the scriptures ; but, by a con-
" stant reading and study of them, will get all the light
" they can from this divine revelation, and nourish

A Second Vindication of the

" themselves up in the words of faith and good doc-
" trine, as St. Paul speaks to Timothy."

If the reading and study of the scripture were more
pressed than it is, and men were fairly sent to the bible
to find their religion ; and not the bible put into their
hands, only to find the opinions of their peculiar sect or
party; Christendom would have more Christians, and
those that are, would be more knowing, and more in
the right, than they now are. That which hinders this,
is that select bundle of doctrines, which it has pleased
every sect to draw out of the scriptures,, or their own
inventions, with an omission (and, as our unmasker
would say, a contempt) of all the rest. These choice
truths (as the unmasker calls his) are to be the standing
orthodoxy of that party, from which none of that
church must recede, without the forfeiture of their
Christianity, and the loss of eternal life. But, whilst the
people keep firm to these, they are in the church, and
the way to salvation : which, in effect, what is it but
to encourage ignorance, laziness, and neglect of the
scriptures ? For what need they be at the pains of con
stantly reading the bible, or perplex their heads with
considering and weighing what is there delivered ; when
believing as the church believes, or saying, after, or
not contradicting their domine, or teacher, serves the
turn ?

Further, I desire it may be considered, what name
that mere mock-show, of recommending to men the
study of the scripture, deserves ; if, when they read it,
they must understand it just as he (that would be, and
they are too apt, contrary to the command of Christ, to
call, their master) tells them. If they find any thing
in the word of God, that leads them into opinions he
does not allow ; if any thing they meet with in holy
writ, seems to them to thwart, or shake the received
doctrines, the very proposing of their doubts renders
them suspected. Reasoning about them, and not ac
quiescing in whatever is said to them, is interpreted
want of due respect and deference to the authority of
their spiritual guides ; disrepute and censures follow :
and if, in pursuance of their own light, they persist in

Reasonableness of Christianity > $C. 295

what they think the scripture teaches them, they are
turned out of the church, delivered to Satan, and no
longer allowed to be Christians. And is thus a sincere
and rightly directed study of the scriptures, that men
may understand and profit thereby, encouraged ? This
is the consequence of men's assuming to themselves a
power of declaring fundamentals, i. e. of setting up a
Christianity of their own making. For how else can
they turn men of as unblameable lives as others of their
members out of the church of Christ (for so they count
their communion) for opinions, unless those opinions
were concluded inconsistent with Christianity? Thus
systems, the invention of men, are turned into so many
opposite gospels ; and nothing is truth in each sect, but
what suits with them. So that the scripture serves but,
like a nose of wax, to be turned and bent, just as may
fit the contrary orthodoxies of different societies. For
it is these several systems, that to each party are the just
standards of truth, and the meaning of the scripture is
to be measured only by them. Whoever relinquishes
any of those distinguishing points, immediately ceases
to be a Christian.

This is the way that the unmasker would have truth
and religion preserved, light and knowledge propagated*
But here too the different sects, giving equal authority
to their own orthodoxies, will be quits with him. For
as far as I can observe, the same genius seems to in
fluence them all, even those who pretend most to free
dom, the socinians themselves. For when it is ob
served, how positive and eager they are in their disputes ;
how forward to have their interpretations of scripture
received for authentic, though to others, in several
places, they seem very much strained ; how impatient
they are of contradiction ; and with what disrespect and
roughness they often treat their opposers : may it not be
suspected, that this so visible a warmth in their present
circumstances, and zeal for their orthodoxy, would
(had they the power) work in them as it does in others ?
They in their turns would, I fear, be ready with their
set of fundamentals ; which they would be as forward to

296 A Second Vindication of the

impose on others, as others have been to impose con
trary fundamentals on them.

This is, and always will be, the unavoidable effect
of intruding on our Saviour's authority, and requiring
more now, as necessary to be believed to make a man a
Christian, than was at first required by our Saviour and
his apostles. What else can be expected among chris-
tians, but their tearing, and being torn in pieces, by
one another ; whilst every sect assumes to itself a power
of declaring fundamentals, and severally thus narrow
Christianity to their distinct systems ? He that has a
mind to see how fundamentals come to be framed and
fashioned, and upon what motives and considerations
they are often taken up, or laid down according to the
humours, interests, or designs of the heads of parties,
as if they were things depending on men's pleasure and
to be suited to their convenience ; may find an example
worth his notice, in the life of Mr. Baxter, part II. p.
197—205.

Whenever men take upon them to go beyond those
fundamental articles of Christianity, which are to be
found in the preachings of our Saviour and his apostles,
where will they stop ? Whenever any set of men will
require more, as necessary to be believed,, to make men
of their church, i. e. in their sense, Christians, than
what our Saviour and his apostles proposed to those
whom they made Christians, and admitted into the
church of Christ ; however they may pretend to recom
mend the scripture to their people, in effect, no more of
it is recommended to them, than just comports with
what the leaders of that sect have resolved Christianity
shall consist in.

It is no wonder, therefore, there is so much igno
rance amongst Christians, and so much vain outcry
against it ; whilst almost every distinct society of chris-
tians magisterially ascribes orthodoxy to a select set of
fundamentals, distinct from those proposed in the preach
ing of our Saviour and his apostles ; which, in no one
point, must be questioned by any of its communion.
By this means their people are never sent to the holy

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 297

scriptures, that true fountain of light, but hood-wink
ed : a veil is cast over their eyes, and then they are bid
to read their bible. They must make it all chime to their
church's fundamentals, or else they were better let it
alone. For if they find any thing1 there against the re
ceived doctrines, though they hold it and express it in
the very terms the Holy Ghost has delivered it in, that
will not excuse them. Heresy will be their lot, and
they shall be treated accordingly. And thus we see how,
amongst other good effects, creed-making always has,
and always will necessarily produce and propagate ig
norance in the world, however each party blame others
for it. And therefore I have often wondered to hear
men of several churches so heartily exclaim against the
implicit faith of the church of Rome ; when the same
implicit faith is as much practised and required in their
own, though not so openly professed, and ingenuously
owned there.

In the next section, the unmasker questions the sin
cerity of mine, and professes the greatness of his con
cern for the salvation of men's souls. And tells me of
my reflection on him, upon that account, in my Vindi
cation, p. 165. Answ. I wish he would, for the right
information of the reader, every-where set down, what
he has any thing to say to, in my book, or my defence
of it, and save me the labour of repeating it. My words
in that place are, " Some men will not bear, that any
" one should speak of religion, but according to the
" model that they themselves have made of it. Nay,
" though he proposes it upon the very terms, and in
" the very words, which our Saviour and his apostles
" preached it in ; yet he shall not escape censures and
" the severest insinuations. To deviate in the least,
" or to omit any thing contained in their articles, is
'• heresy, under the most invidious names in fashion ;
" and it is well if he escapes being a downright atheist.
" Whether this be the way for teachers to make them-
" selves hearkened to, as men in earnest in religion,
" and really concerned for the salvation of men's souls,
" I leave them to consider. What success it has had,
" towards persuading men of the truth of Christianity,

298 A Second Vindication of the

" their own complaints of the prevalency of atheism,
" on the one hand, and the number of deists on the
" other, sufficiently show."

I have set down this passage at large, both as a con
firmation of what I said but just now : and also to show,
that the reflection I there made needed some other an
swer, than a bare profession of his " regard to the salva-
" tion of men's souls." The assuming an undue autho
rity to his own opinions, and using manifest untruths in
the defence of them, I am sure is no mark, that the di
recting men right in the way to salvation is his chief
aim. And I wish that the greater liberties of that sort,
which he has again taken in his Socinianism unmasked,
and which I have so often laid open, had not confirmed
that reflection. I should have been glad, that any thing
in my book had been fairly controverted and brought
to the touch, whether it had or had not been confuted.
The matter of it would have deserved a serious debate
(if any had been necessary) in the words of sobriety,
and the charitable temper of the gospel, as I desired in
my preface : and that would not have misbecome the
unmasker's function. But it did not consist, it seems,
with his design. Christian charity would not have al
lowed those ill-meant conjectures, and groundless cen
sures, which were necessary to his purpose : and there
fore he took a shorter course,, than to confute rny book,
and thereby convince me and others. He makes it his
business to rail at it and the author of it, that that might
be taken for a confutation. For by what he has hither
to done, arguing seems not to be his talent. And thus
far, who can but allow his wisdom ? But whether it be
that " wisdom that is from above ; first pure, then
" peaceable, gentle, . easy to be intreated, full of mercy,
<( and good fruits, without partiality, and without hy-
" pocrisy ;" I shall leave to other readers to judge.

His saying nothing to that other reflection, which
his manner of expressing himself drew from me, would
make one suspect, it savoured not altogether of the
wisdom of the gospel ; nor showed an over-great care
of the salvation of souls. My words, Vindication, p. 173,
are : " I know not how better to show my care of

Reasonableness of Christianity^ 8$c.

" his credit, than by entreating him, that when he takes
" next in hand such a subject as this, wherein the sal-
" vation of souls is concerned, he would treat it a
" little more seriously, and with a little more candour,
" lest men should find in his writings another cause of
" atheism, which in this treatise he has not thought fit
<: to mention. Ostentation of wit in general, he has
" made a cause of atheism, p. 28. But the world will
" tell him, that frothy light discourses, concerning the
" serious matters of religion, and ostentation of trifling
" misbecoming wit, in those who come as ambassadors
" from God, under the title of successors of the apos-
" ties, in the great commission of the gospel, are none
" of the least causes of atheism/' But this advice I am
now satisfied (by his second part of the same strain) was
very improper for him ; and no more reasonable, than
if one should advise a buffoon to talk gravely, who has
nothing left to draw attention, if he should lay by his
scurrility.

The remainder of this fourth chapter, p. 61 — 67,
being spent in showing, why the socinians are for a few
articles of faith, being a matter that I am not concerned
in ; I leave to that forward gentleman to examine, who
examined Mr. Edwards's exceptions against the " Rea-
" sonableness of Christianity ;" and who, as the un-
masker informs me, page 64, was chosen to vindicate
my attempt, &c.

If the unmasker knows that he was so chosen, it is
well. If I had known of such a choice, I should have
desired that somebody should have been chosen to vin
dicate my attempt, who had understood it better. The
unmasker and examiner are each of them so full of
themselves, and their own systems, that I think they
may be a fit match one for another ; and so I leave these
cocks of the game to try it out in an endless battle of
wrangling ('till death them part) which of them has
made the true and exact collection of fundamentals ;
and whose system of the two ought to be the prevail
ing orthodoxy, and be received for scripture. Only I
warn the examiner to look to himself: for the unmasker
has the whip hand of him, and gives him to under-

300 A Second Vindication of the

stand, p. 65, that if he cannot do it himself by the
strength of his lungs, the vehemency of his oratory, and
endless attacks of his repetitions ; the ecclesiastical
power, and the civil magistrate's lash, have, in store,
demonstrative arguments to convince him that his [the
imrnasker's] system is the only true Christianity.

By the way, I must not forget to mind the unmasker
here again, that he hath a very unlucky hand at guess
ing. For whereas he names Socinus, as one from whom
I received my platform, and says that " Crellius gave
" me my cue;" it so falls out, that they are two authors
of whom I never read a page. I say not this, as if I
thought it a fault if I had ; for I think I should have
much better spent my time in them, than in the writ
ings of our learned unmasker.

I was sure there was no offending the unmasker,
without the guilt of atheism ; only he here, p. 69, very
mercifully lays it upon my book, and not upon my de
sign. The " tendency of it to irreligion and atheism,"
he has proved in an eloquent harangue, for he is such
an orator he cannot stir a foot without a speech (made)
as he bids us suppose, by the atheistical rabble. And
who can deny, but he has chosen a fit employment for
himself? Where could there be found a better speech-
maker for the atheistical rabble ? But let us hear him :
for though he would give the atheistical rabble the cre
dit of it, yet it is the unmasker speaks. And because
it is a pity such a pattern of rhetoric and reason should
be lost, I have, for my reader's edification, set it all
down verbatim.

" We are beholden to this worthy adventurer for
" ridding the world of so great an incumbrance, viz.
" that huge mass and unwieldy body of Christianity,
" which took up so much room. Now we see that it
" was this bulk, and not that of mankind, which he had
" an eye to, when he so often mentioned this latter.
" This is a physician for our turn, indeed ; we like this
" chymical operator, that doth not trouble us with a
" parcel of heavy drugs of no value, but contracts it all
<e into a few spirits, nay doth his business with a single
" drop. We have been in bondage a long time to

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 301

" creeds and catechisms, systems and confessions ; we

" have been plagued with a tedious head-roll of articles,

" which our reverend divines have told us, we must

" make the matter of our faith. Yea, so it is, both

" conformists arid nonconformists (though disagreeing

" in some other things) have agreed in this, to molest

" and crucify us. But this noble writer (we thank

" him) hath set us free, and eased us, by bringing down

" all the Christian faith into one point. We have heard

" some men talk of epistolary composures of the New

" Testament, as if great matters were contained in

" them, as if the great mysteries of Christianity (as they

" call them) were unfolded there : but we could never

" make any thing of them ; and now we find that this

" writer is partly of our opinion. He tells us that

" these are letters sent upon occasion; but we are not

" to look for our religion (for now, for this gentleman's

" sake, we begin to talk of religion) in these places.

" We believe it, and we believe that there is no religion

" but in those very chapters and verses, which he has

" set down in his treatise. What need we have any

" other part of the New Testament ? That is bible

" enough, if not too much. Happy, thrice happy shall

" this author be perpetually esteemed by us ; we will

" chronicle him as our friend and benefactor. It is

" not our way to saint people, otherwise we would

" certainly canonize this gentleman ; and when our

" hand is in, his pair of booksellers, for their being so

" beneficial to the world in publishing so rich a trea-

" sure. It was a blessed day, when this hopeful birth

" saw the light; for hereby all the orthodox creed-

" makers and systematic men are ruined for ever. In

" brief, if we be for any Christianity, it shall be

" this author's : for that agrees with us singularly

" well, it being so short, all couched in four words,

" neither more nor less. It is a very fine compendium,

" and we are infinitely obliged to this great reformer

" for it. We are glad at heart, that Christianity is
"brought so low by this worthy penman; for this is

" a good presage, that it will dwindle into nothing.

" What ! but one article, and that so brief too ! We

30£ A Second Vindication of the

" like such a faith, and such a religion, because it is
" nearer to none."

He hath no sooner done, but, as it deserved, he cries
out, " Euge, sophos ! and is not the reader," quoth he,
f< satisfied that such language as this hath real truth in
" it ? Does not he perceive, that the discarding all the
" articles but one, makes way for the casting off that
" too ?" Answ. It is but supposing that the reader is a
civil gentleman, and answers, Yes, to these two ques
tions ; and then it is demonstration, that by this speech
he has irrefragably proved the tendency of my book to
irreligion and atheism.

I remember Chillingworth somewhere puts up this re
quest to his adversary Knot : " Sir, 1 beseech you, when
" you write again, do us the favour to write nothing but
" syllogisms. For I find it still an extreme trouble to
" find out the concealed propositions, which are to con-
" nect the parts of your enthymems. As now, for
" example, I profess to you I have done my best en-
" deavour to find some glue, or solder, or cement, or
" thread, or any thing to tie the antecedent and this
" consequent together." The unmasker agrees so much
in a great part of his opinion with that Jesuit, (as I have
shown already,) and does so infinitely out-do him in
spinning ropes of sand, and a coarse thread of incon
sistencies, which runs quite through his bock ; that it is
with great justice I put him here in the Jesuit's place,
and address the same request to him.

His very next words give me a fresh reason to do it:
for thus he argues, p. 72, " May we not expect, that
" those who deal thus with the creed, i. e. discard all
" the articles of it but one, will use the same method
" in reducing the ten commandments and the Lord's
" prayer, abbreviate the former into one precept, and
" the latter into one petition?" Answ. If he will tell
me where this creed he speaks of is, it will be much
more easy to answer his demand. Whilst his creed,
which he here speaks of, is yet no-where, it is ridiculous
for him to ask questions about it. The ten command
ments, and the Lord's prayer, I know where to find in
express words, set down by themselves, with peculiar

Reasonableness of Christianity, <$c. 303

marks of distinction. Which is the Lord's prayer, we
are plainly taught by this command of our Saviour,
Luke xi. 2, " when ye pray, say, Our father," &c.
In the same manner and words, we are taught what we
should believe, to make us his disciples, by his command
to the apostles what they should preach, Matt. x. 7>
" As ye go, preach, saying," (What were they to say ?
Only this) " The kingdom of heaven is at hand." Or,
as St. Luke expresses it, chap. ix. 2, They were sent
" to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the
" sick:" which, what it was, we have sufficiently ex
plained. But this creed of the unmasker, which he
talks of, where is it ? Let him show it us distinctly set
out from the rest of the scripture. If he knows where
it is, let him produce it, or leave talking of it, until
he can. It is not the apostles creed, that is evident ;
for that creed he has discarded from being the standard
of Christian faith, and has told the world in words at
length, That " if a man believes no more than is in
" express terms in the apostles creed, his faith will not
" be the faith of a Christian." Nay, it is plain, that
creed has, in the unmasker's opinion, the same tendency
to atheism and irreligion, that my summary has. For
the apostles creed, reducing the forty, or, perhaps, the
four hundred fundamental articles of his Christian creed
to twelve ; and leaving out the greatest part of those
necessary ones, which he has already, and will here
after, in good time, give us ; does as much dispose men
to serve the decalogue, and the Lord's prayer, just so,
as my reducing those twelve to two. For so many, at
least, he has granted to be in my summary, viz. the ar
ticle of one God, maker of heaven and earth ; and the
other, of Jesus the Messiah ; though he every-where
calls them but one ; which, whether it be to show, with
what love and regard to truth he continues, and conse
quently began this controversy ; or whether it be to be
guile and startle unwary, or confirm prejudiced readers ;
I shall leave others to judge. It is evident, he thinks his
cause would be mightily maimed, if he were forced to
leave out the charge of one article ; and he would not
know what to do for wit or argument, if he should call

304 A Second Vindication of the

them two : for then the whole weight and edge of his
strong and sharp reasoning, in his " Thoughts con-
" cerning the causes of atheism/' p. 122, would be
lost. There you have it in these words : " When the
" catholic faith is thus brought down to one single ar-
" tide, it will soon be reduced to none ; the unit will
" dwindle into a cypher." And here again, it makes
the whole argument of his atheistical speech, which he
winds up with these convincing words : " We are glad
" to hear, that Christianity is brought so low by this
" worthy penman ; for this is a good presage, that it
" will dwindle into nothing. What ! one article, and
" that so brief too ! We like such a faith, and such a
" religion, because it is so near none." But I must tell
this writer, of equal wit, sense, and modesty, that this
religion, which he thus makes a dull farce of, and calls
" near none," is that very religion which our Saviour
Jesus Christ and his apostles preached, for the conver
sion and salvation of mankind ; no one article whereof,
which they proposed as necessary to be received by un
believers, to make them Christians, is omitted. And I
ask him, Whether it be his errand, as one of our Sa
viour's ambassadors, to turn it thus into ridicule ? For
until he has shown, that they preached otherwise, and
more than what the Spirit of truth has recorded of their
preaching in their histories, which I have faithfully
collected, and set down ; all that he shall say, reflecting
upon the plainness and simplicity of their doctrine,
however directed against me, will by his atheistical
rabble of all kinds, now they are so well entered and
instructed in it by him, be all turned upon our Saviour
and his apostles.

What tendency this, and all his other trifling, in so
serious a cause as this is, has to the propagating of
atheism and irreligion in this age, he were best to
consider. This I am sure, the doctrine of but one ar
ticle (if the author and finisher of our faith, and those
he guided by his Spirit, had preached but one article)
has no more tendency to atheism, than their doctrine
of one God. But the unmasker every-where talks, as
if the strength of our religion lay in the number of its

Reasonableness of Christianity > S$c. 305

articles ; and would be presently routed, if it had been
but a few ; and therefore he has mustered up a pretty
full band of them, and has a reserve of the Lord knows
how many more, which shall be forth-coming- upon oc
casion. But I shall desire to remind this learned divine,
who is so afraid of what will become of his religion, if it
should propose but one or a few articles, as necessary to
be believed to make a man a Christian ; that the strength
and security of our religion lies in the divine authority
of those who first promulgated the terms of admittance
into the church, and not in the multitude of articles,
supposed by some necessary to be believed to make a
man a Christian : and I would have him remember,
when he goes next to make use of this strong argument
of " one dwindling into a cypher," that one is as re
mote as a million from none. And if this be not so, I
desire to know whether his way of arguing will not
prove pagan polytheism to be more remote from atheism
than Christianity. He will do well to try the force of
his speech in the mouth of an heathen, complaining of
the tendency of Christianity to atheism, by reducing his
great number of gods to but one, which was so near
none, and would, therefore, soon be reduced to none.

The unmasker seems to be upon the same topic,
where he so pathetically complains of the socinians,
p. 66, in these words ; " It is enough to rob us of our
" God, by denying Christ to be so ; but must they spoil
" us of all the other articles of Christian faith but one ? "
Have a better heart, good sir, for I assure you nobody
can rob you of your God, but by your own consent,
nor spoil you of any of the articles of your faith. If you
look for them, where God has placed them, in the holy
scripture, and take them as he has framed and fashioned
them there ; there you will always find them safe and
sound. But if they come out of an artificer's shop, and
be of human invention, I cannot answer for them : they
may, for aught I know, be nothing but an idol of your
own setting up, which may be pulled down, should
you cry out ever so much, u Great is Diana of the
" Ephesians!"

x

306 A Second Vindication of the

He, who considers this argument of one and none, as
managed by the unmasker, and observes his pathetical
way of reasoning all through his book, must confess,
that he has got the very philosopher's stone in dis
puting. That which would be worthless lead in others,
he turns into pure gold ; his oratory changes its nature,
and gives it the noble tincture : so that what, in plain
reasoning, would be nonsense, let him but put it into a
speech, or an exclamation, and there it becomes strong
argument. Whether this be not so, I desire mode and
figure may decide. And to those I shall desire he would
reduce the proofs, which, p. 73, he says he has given of
these following propositions, viz.

XXIX. " That I have corrupted men's minds."

XXX. « That I have depraved the gospel."

XXXI. " That I have abused Christianity."

For all these three, p. 73, he affirms of me without
proof and without honesty.

Whether it be from confusion of thought, or unfair
ness of design ; either because he has not clear distinct
notions of what he would say, or finds it not to his pur
pose to speak them clearly out, or both together ; so it
is, that the unmasker very seldom, but when he rails,
delivers himself so that one can certainly tell what he
would have.

The question is, What is absolutely necessary to be
believed by every one to make him a Christian ? It has
been clearly made out, from an exact survey of the
history of our Saviour and his apostles, that the whole
aim of all their preaching every- where was, to convince
the unbelieving world of these two great truths ; first,
That there was one, eternal, invisible God, maker of
heaven and earth : and next, that Jesus of Nazareth
was the Messiah, the promised King and Saviour : and
that, upon men's believing these two articles, they were
baptized and admitted into the church, i. e. received

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 307

as subjects of Christ's kingdom, and pronounced be^
lievers. From whence it unavoidably follows, that
these two are the only truths necessary to be believed
to make a man a Christian.

This matter of fact is so evident from the whole tenour
of the four Gospels and the Acts ; and presses so hard,
that the unmasker, who contends for a great number of
other points necessary to be believed to make a man a
Christian, thinks himself concerned to give some answer
to it; but, in his usual way, full of uncertainty and
confusion. To clear this matter, he lays down four
particulars ; the first is, p. 74, u That the belieting
" Jesus to be the promised Messiah, was the first step
" to Christianity."

The second, p. 76, " That though this one proposi-
" tion, (viz. of Jesus the Messiah) be mentioned alone
" in some places, yet there is reason to think, and be
" persuaded, that at the same time other matters of
" faith were proposed."

The third, p. 76, " That though there are several
" parts and members of the Christian faith, yet they do
" not all occur in any one place of scripture."

The fourth, p. 78, " That Christianity was erected by
" degrees."

These particulars he tells us, p. 74, " he offers to
" clear an objection." To see, therefore, whether they
are pertinent or no, we must examine what the objection
is, as he puts it. I think it might have been put in a
few words : this I am sure, it ought to have been put
very clear and distinct. But the unmasker has been
pleased to give it us, p. 73, as followeth, " Because I
" designed these papers for the satisfying of the reader's
" doubts, about any thing occurring, concerning the
" matter before us, and for the establishing of his
" wavering mind ; I will here (before I pass to the se-
66 cond general head of my discourse) answer a query,
" or objection, which some, and not without some
" show of ground, may be apt to start : how comes it
" to pass, they will say, that this article of faith, viz.
" that Jesus is the Messiah, or Christ, is so often re-
" peated in the New Testament ? Why is this sometimes

x 2

308 A Second Vindication of the

" urged, without the mentioning- of any other article of
" belief? Doth not this plainly show, that this is all
" that is required to be believed, as necessary to make
" a man a Christian ? May we not infer, from the fre-
<c quent and sole repetition of this article in several
" places of the evangelists and the Acts, that there is no
" other point of faith of absolute necessity ; but that
f( this alone is sufficient to constitute a man a true
" member of Christ?"

By which he shows, that he is uncertain which way
to put the objection, so as may be easiest to get rid of
it : and therefore he has turned it several ways, and
put several questions about it. As first,

" Why this article of faith," viz. that Jesus is the
Messiah, " is often so repeated in the New Testament ? "

His next question is, " Why is this sometimes urged
" without the mentioning any other article of belief? "
which supposes, that sometimes other articles of belief
are mentioned with it.

The third question is, " May we not infer, from the
" frequent and sole repetition of this article^ in several
" places of the evangelists and Acts ? "

Which last question is in effect, Why is this so fre
quently and' alone repeated in the evangelists and the
Acts? i. e. in the preachings of our Saviour and his
apostles to unbelievers. For of that he must give an
account, if he will remove the difficulty. Which three,
though put as one, yet are three as distinct questions,
and demand a reason for three as distinct matters of
fact, as these three are, viz. frequently proposed : some
times proposed alone; and always proposed alone, in
the preachings of our Saviour and his apostles : for so
in truth it was all through the Gospels and the Actsr
to the unconverted believers of one God alone.

These three questions being thus jumbled together in
one objection, let us see how the four particulars., he
mentions, will account for them.

The first of them is this : " That believing Jesus to be
" the promised Messias," was, says he, " the first step
" to Christianity." Let it be so : What do you infer

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 309

from thence ? The next words show : " therefore this,
" rather than any other article, was propounded to be
" believed by all those, whom either our Saviour or
" his apostles invited to embrace Christianity." Let
your premises be ever so true, and your deduction of
this proposition be ever so regular from them, it is all
lost labour. This conclusion is not the proposition you
were to prove. Your questions were, " Why this article
" is so often proposed ? " And in those frequent repeti
tions, " Why sometimes urged alone, and why always
" proposed alone, viz. to those whom either our Saviour
" or his apostles invited to embrace Christianity ? " And
your answer is, Because the believing " Jesus to be the
" Messias, was the first step to Christianity." This
therefore remains upon you to be proved,,

XXXII. " That, because the believing Jesus to be
" the Messias is the first step to Christianity, there-
" fore this article is frequently proposed in the
" New Testament, is sometimes proposed without
" the mentioning any other article, and always
" alone to unbelievers."

And when you have proved this, I shall desire you to
apply it to our present controversy.

His next answer to those questions is in these words,
p. 76, " That though this one proposition, or article, be
" mentioned alone in some places, yet there is reason
" to think, and be persuaded, that at the same time
" other matters of faith were proposed." From whence
it lies upon him to make out this reasoning, viz.

XXXII I. " That because there is reason to think,
" and be persuaded, that at the same time that this
" one article was mentioned alone, (as it was
" sometimes,) other matters of faith were pro-
" posed : therefore this article was often proposed
" in the New Testament ; sometimes proposed
" alone ; and always proposed alone, in the preach-
" ings of our Saviour and his apostles to unbe*
*' lievers."

310 A Second Vindication of the

This I set down to show the force of his answer to his
questions : supposing it to be true, not that I grant it
to be true, that where " this one article is mentioned
" alone, we have reason to think, and be persuaded ,
" that at the same time other matters of faith [i. e. ar-
" tides of faith necessary to be believed to make a man
u a Christian] were proposed : " and I doubt not but to
show the contrary.

His third particular, in answer to the question pro
posed in his objection, stands thus, p. 76', " That
" though there are several parts and members of the
" Christian faith, yet they do not all occur in any one
" place of the scripture;3' which answer lays it upon
him to prove,

XXXIV. That because " the several parts of the
" members of the Christian faith do not all occur
" in any one place of scripture," therefore this ar
ticle, that Jesus was the " Messias, was often
" proposed in the New Testament, sometimes pro-
" posed alone, and always proposed alone," in the
preachings of our Saviour and his apostles, through
the history of the evangelists and the Acts.

The fourth and last particular, which he tell us is the
main answer to the objection, is in these words, page 78,
" That Christianity was erected by degrees."

Which requires him to make out his argument, viz.

XXXV. " That because Christianity was erected by
" degrees, therefore this article, that Jesus was
" the Messias, was often proposed in the New Tes-
" tament, sometimes proposed alone, and always
" proposed alone in the preachings of our Saviour
" and his apostles to unbelievers, recorded in the
" history of the evangelists and Acts."

For, as I said before, in these three questions he has
put his objection ; to which he tells us, this is the main
answer.

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 311

Of these four particulars it is, that he says, p. 74, to
" clear this objection, and to give a full and satisfactory
" answer to all doubts in this affair, I offer these en-
" suing particulars, which will lead the reader to the
" right understanding of the whole case."

How well they have cleared the objection, may be seen
by barely setting them down as answers to the questions,,
wherein he puts the objection.

This is all I have hitherto done; whereby is very
visible, how well (supposing them true) they clear the
objection : and how pertinently they are brought to
answer those questions wherein his objection is con
tained. Perhaps it will be said, that neither these, nor
any thing else, can be an apposite answer to those ques
tions put so together. I answer, I am of the same
mind. But if the un masker through ignorance or shuf
fling, will talk thus confusedly, he must answer for it.
He calls all his three questions, one objection, over
and over again : and therefore, which of those questions
it does or does not lie in, I shall not trouble myself to
divine ; since I think he himself cannot tell : for which
ever he takes of them, it will involve him in equal dif
ficulties. I now proceed to examine his particulars
themselves, and the truth contained in them. The first,
p. 74, stands thus :

1. " The believing of Jesus to be the promised
" Messias was the first step to Christianity. It was that
" which made way for the embracing of all the other
" articles, a passage to all the rest/' Answ. If this be,
as he would have it, only the leading article, amongst a
great many others, equally necessary to be believed, to
make a man a Christian ; this is a reason why it should
be constantly preached in the first place : but this is no
reason why this alone should be so often repeated, and
the other necessary points not be once mentioned.
For I desire to know what those other articles are that,
in the preaching of our Saviour and his apostles, are re
peated or urged besides this ?

In the next place, if it be true, that this article, viz.
that Jesus is the Messiah, was only the first in order
amongst a great many articles, as necessary to be be-

A Second Vindication of the

lieved ; how comes it to pass, that barely upon the
proposal and believing of this, men were admitted into
the church as believers ? The history of the New Tes
tament is full of instances of this, as Acts viii. 5, 12, 13.
ix. and in other places.

Though it be true, what the unmasker says here,
" That if they did not give credit to this in the first
" place, that Jesus of Nazareth was that eminent and
66 extraordinary person prophesied of long before, and
" that he was sent and commissioned by God ; there
" could be no hope that they would attend to any
" other proposals, relating to the Christian religion ; "
yet what he subjoins, " that this is the true reason,
" why that article was constantly propounded to be be-
" lieved by all that looked towards Christianity,, and
" why it is mentioned so often in the evangelical writ-
" ings," is not true. For, first, this supposes that there
were other articles joined with it. This he should have
first proved, and then given the reason for it ; and not,
as he does here, suppose what is in question, and then
give a reason why it is so ; and such a reason that is in
consistent with the matter of fact, that is every- where
recorded in holy writ. For if the true reason why the
preaching of this article, " that Jesus was the Messiah,"
as it is recorded in the history of the New Testament,
were only to make way for the other articles, one must
needs think, that either our Saviour and his apostles
(with reverence be it spoken) were very strange
preachers ; or, that the evangelists, and author of the
Acts, were very strange historians. The first were to
instruct the world in a new religion, consisting of a
great number of articles, says the unmasker, necessary
to be believed to make a man a Christian, i. e. a great
number of propositions, making a large system, every
one whereof is so necessary for a man to understand and
believe, that if any one be omitted, he cannot be of that
religion. What now did our Saviour and his apostles
do ? Why, if the unmasker may be believed, they went
up and down with danger of their lives, and preached
to the world. What did they preach? Even this
single proposition to make way for the rest, viz. " This

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 313

" is the eminent man sent from God," to teach you
other things : which amounts to no more but this,
that Jesus was the person which was to teach them the
true religion, but the true religion itself is not to be
found in all their preaching ; nay, scarce a word of it.
Can there be any thing more ridiculous than this ? And
yet this was all they preached, if it be true,, that this
was all they meant by the preaching every-where,
Jesus to be the Messiah, and if it were only an introduc
tion, and a making way for the doctrines of the gospel.
But it is plain, it was called the gospel itself. Let the
unmasker, as a true successor of the apostles, go and
preach the gospel, as the apostles did, to some part of
the heathen world, where the name of Christ is not
known : would not he himself, and every body think,
he was very foolishly employed, if he should tell them
nothing but this, that Jesus was the person promised
and sent from God to reveal the true religion ; but
should teach them nothing of that true religion, but this
preliminary article ? Such the unmasker makes all the
preaching, recorded in the New Testament, for the con
version of the unbelieving world. He makes the
preaching of our Saviour and his apostles to be no more
but this, that the great prophet promised to the world
was come, and that Jesus was he : but what his doctrine
was, that they were silent in, and taught not one article
of it. But the unmasker misrepresents it : for as to his
accusing the historians, the evangelists, and writers of the
Acts of the apostles, for their shameful omission of the
whole doctrine of the Christian religion, to save his
hypothesis, as he does under his next head-, in these
words : " that though this one proposition be mentioned
" alone in some places, yet there is reason to think,
" and be persuaded, that at the same time other matters
" of faith were proposed;" I shall show how bold he
makes with those inspired historians, when I come to
consider that particular.

How ridiculous, how senseless, this bold unmasker,
and reformer of the history of the New Testament, makes
the preaching of our Saviour and his apostles, as it
stands recorded of them by infallible writers, is visible.

314 A Second Vindication of the

But taking it, as in truth it is there, we shall have a
quite other view of it. Our Saviour preached every
where the kingdom of God ; and by his miracles de
clared himself to be the king of that kingdom. The
apostles preached the same, and after his ascension,
openly avowed him to be the Prince and Saviour pro
mised : but preached not this as a bare speculative
article of simple belief; but that men might receive
him for their King, and become his subjects. When
they told the world that he was the Christ, it was not
as the unmasker will have it : believe this man to be a
prophet, and then he will teach you his new religion ;
which when you have received and embraced all and
every article thereof, which are a great number, you
will then be Christians, if you be not ignorant or in
credulous of any of them. But it was, believe this
man to be your King sent from God ; take him for
such, with a resolution to observe the laws he has given
you ; and you are his subjects, you are Christians. For
those that truly did so, made themselves his subjects ;
and to continue so, there was no more required, than a
sincere endeavour to know his will in all things, and to
obey it. Such a preaching as this, of Jesus to be the
Messiah, the King and Deliverer, that God almighty
had promised to mankind, and now had effectually sent,
to be their Prince and Ruler, was not a simple prepara
tion to the gospel : but, when received with the obe
dience of faith, was the very receiving of the gospel,
and had all that was requisite to make men Christians.
And without it be so understood, nobody can clear the
preaching of our Saviour and his apostles from that
incredible imperfection, or their historians from that
unpardonable negligence, and not doing either what
they ought, or what they undertook, which our un-
rnasker hath so impiously charged upon them ; as will
appear yet plainer, in what I have to say to the un-
masker's next particular. For, as to the remainder of
this paragraph, it contains nothing but his censure and
contempt of me, for not being of his mind, for not
seeing as he sees, i. e. in effect not laying that blame
which he does, either on the preaching of our Saviour

Reasonableness of Christianity 9 8$c. 315

and his apostles, or on the inspired writings of their
historians, to make them comply with his system, and
the Christianity he would make.

The unmasker's second particular, p. 76, tells us,
" That though this one proposition or article be men-
" tioned alone in some places, yet there is reason to
" think and be persuaded, that at the same time other
" matters of faith were proposed. For it is confessed,
" by all intelligent and observing men, that the histoiy
" of the scripture is concise ; and that in relating matter
" of fact, many passages are omitted by the sacred
" penmen. Wherefore, though but this one article of
" belief (because it is a leading one, and makes way
" for the rest) be expressly mentioned in some of the
" gospels, yet we must not conclude thence, that no
" other matter of faith was required to be admitted of.
" For things are briefly set down in the evangelical
" records, and we must suppose many things which
" are not in direct terms related."

Answ. The unmasker here keeps to his usual custom
of speaking in doubtful terms. He says, that where this
one article that Jesus is the Messiah, is alone recorded
in the preaching of our Saviour and his apostles ; " We
" have reason to be persuaded, that at the same time
" other matters of faith were proposed/' If this be to
his purpose, by matters of faith, must be meant funda
mental articles of faith, absolutely necessary to be be
lieved by every man to make him a Christian. That
such matters of faith are omitted, in the history of the
preaching of our Saviour and his apostles, by the sacred
historians ; this, he says, " we have reason to be per-
" suaded of."

Answ. They need be good reasons to persuade a ra
tional man, that the evangelists, in their history of our
Saviour and his apostles, (if they were but ordinarily
fair and prudent men,) did, in an history published to
instruct the world in a new religion, leave out the ne
cessary and fundamental parts of that religion. But let
them be considered as inspired writers, under the con
duct of the infallible Spirit of God, putting them upon,
and directing them in, the writing of this history of the

316 A Second Vindication of the

gospel : and then it is impossible for any Christian, but
the immasker, to think, that they made any such gross
omissions, contrary to the design of their writing, with
out a demonstration to convince him of it. Now all the
reason that our un masker gives is this : " That it is
" confessed by all intelligent and observing men, that
" the history of the scripture is concise ; and that in
" relating matters of fact, many passages are omitted
" by the sacred penmen."

Answ. The unmasker might have spared the confes
sion of intelligent and observing men, after so plain a
declaration of St. John himself, chap. xx. 31, " Many
" other things did Jesus in the presence of his disciples,
" which are not written in this book." And again,
xxi. 25, " There are also many other things that Jesus
" did, the which if they should be written every one,
" I suppose the world could not contain the books that
" should be written." There needs, therefore, no opi
nion of intelligent and observing men to convince us,,
that the history of the gospel is so far concise, that a
great many matters of fact are omitted, and a great
many less material circumstances, even of those that are
set down. But will any intelligent or observing man,
any one that bears the name of a Christian, have the
impudence to say, that the inspired writers, in the re
lation they give us of what Christ and his apostles
preached to unbelievers to convert them to the faith,
omitted the fundamental articles, which those preachers
proposed to make men Christians ; and without a belief
of which, they could not be Christians ?

The unmasker talks after his wonted fashion ; i. e.
seems to say something, which, when examined, proves
nothing to his purpose. He tells us, " That in some
6i places," where the article of " Jesus the Messiah is
" mentioned alone, at the same time other matters of
" faith were proposed." I ask, were these other mat
ters of faith all the unmasker 's necessary articles ? If
not, what are those other matters of faith to the un-
masker's purpose? As for example, in St. Peter's sermon,
Acts ii. " Other matters of faith were proposed with
" the article of Jesus the Messiah." But what does this

Reasonableness of Christianity, <fyc. 317

make for his fundamental articles : were they all pro
posed with the article of Jesus the Messiah ? If not, un
believers were converted, and brought into the church,
without the un masker's necessary articles. Three thou
sand were added to the church by this one sermon. I
pass by, now, St. Luke's not mentioning a syllable of
the greatest part of the unmasker's necessary articles ;
arid shall consider only, how long that sermon may have
been. It is plain from ver. 15, that it began not until
about nine in the morning; and from ver. 41, that
before night three thousand were converted and bap
tized. Now I ask the unmasker, Whether so small a
number of hours, as Peter must necessarily employ in
preaching to them, were sufficient to instruct such a
mixed multitude so fully in all those articles, which he
has proposed as necessary to be believed to make a man
a Christian ; as that every one of those three thousand,
that were that day baptized, did understand, and ex
plicitly believe every one of those his articles, just in
the sense of our unmasker's system? Not to mention
those remaining articles, which the unmasker will not
be able, in twice as many months, to find and declare
to us.

He says, " That in some places/' where the article
of " Jesus the Messiah is mentioned alone, at the same
" time other matters of faith were proposed:" Let us
take this to be so at present, yet this helps not the un
masker's case. The fundamental articles, that were
proposed by our Saviour and his apostles, necessary to
be believed to make men Christians, are not set down ;
but only this single one, of " Jesus the Messiah :" there
fore, will any one dare to say they are omitted every
where by the evangelists ? Did the historians of the
gospel make their relation so concise and short, that
giving an account in so many places of the preaching
of our Saviour and his apostles, for the conversion of the
unbelieving world, they did not in any one place, nor
in all of them together, set down the necessary points of
that faith, which their unbelieving hearers were con
verted to ? If they did not, how can their histories be
called the Gospels of Jesus Christ ? Or how can they

318 A Second Vindication of the

serve to the end for which they were written ? Which
was to publish to the world the doctrine of Jesus Christ,
that men might be brought into his religion. Now I
challenge the unmasker to show me, not out of any one
place, but out of all the preachings of our Saviour and
his apostles, recorded in the four Gospels, and in the
Acts, all those propositions which he has reckoned up
as fundamental articles of faith. If they are not to be
found there, it is plain, that either they are not articles
of faith, necessary to be believed to make a man a
Christian ; or else, that those inspired writers have given
us an account of the gospel, or Christian religion, where
in the greatest part of the doctrines necessary to be
believed to make a man a Christian, are wholly omitted.
Which in short is to say, that the Christianity, which is
recorded in the Gospels and the Acts, is not that Chris
tianity which is sufficient to make a man a Christian.
This (as absurd and impious as it is) is what our un
masker charges upon the conciseness (as he is pleased
to call it) of the evangelical history. And this we
must take upon his word, though these inspired writers
tell us the direct contrary : for St. Luke, in his preface
to his gospel, tells Theophilus,, that having a perfect
knowledge. of all things, the design of his writing was
to set them in order, that he might know the certainty
of those things that were believed amongst Christians.
And his history of the Acts begins thus : " The for-
" mer treatise [i. e. his gospel] have I made, O Theo-
" philus, of all that Jesus began to do and to teach."
So that, how concise soever the unmasker will have his
history to be, he professes it to contain all that Jesus
taught. Which all must, in the narrowest sense that
can be given it, contain at least all things necessary to
make a man a Christian. It would else be a very lame
and imperfect history of all that Jesus taught, if the faith
contained in it were not sufficient to make a man a
Christian. This indeed, as the unmasker hath been
pleased to term it, would be a very lank faith, a very
lank gospel.

St. John also says thus, of his history of the gospel,
chap. xx. 30, 31, " Many other signs truly did Jesus,

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 319

" in the presence of his disciples, which are not written
" in this book:" so far his history is, by his own con
fession, concise. " But these," says he, " are written
" that ye might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the
" Son of God ; and that, believing-, ye might have life
" through his name." As concise as it was, there was
yet (if the apostle's word may be taken for it against
the unmasker's) enough contained in his gospel, for the
procuring of eternal life, to those who believed it. And,

, whether it was that one article that he here sets down,
viz. That Jesus was the Messiah, or that set of articles
which the immasker gives us, I shall leave to this mo
dern divine to resolve. And, if he thinks still, that all
the articles he has set down in his roll, are necessary to
be believed to make a man a Christian, I must desire
him to show them to me in St. John's gospel, or else to
convince the world, that St. John was mistaken, when
he said, that he had written his gospel, that men might
believe that "Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God;
" and that^ believing, they might have life through his
" name."

So that, granting the history of the scripture to be so
concise, as the un masker would have it, viz. that in some
places the infallible writers, recording the discourses of
our Saviour and his apostles, omitted all the other fun
damental articles proposed by them to be believed to
make men Christians, but this one, that Jesus was the
Messiah ; yet this will not remove the objection that lies
against his other fundamentals, which are not to be
found in the histories of the four evangelists ; nay, not to
be found in any one of them. If every one of them con
tains the gospel of Jesus Christ, and consequently all
things necessary to salvation, whether this will not be a
new ground of accusation against me, and give the im
masker a right to charge me with laying by three of the
gospels with contempt, as well as he did before charge
me with a contempt of the epistles ; must be left to his
sovereign authority to determine.

Having showed that, allowing all he says here to be as
he would have it, yet it clears not the objection that
lies against his fundamentals; I shall now examine

320 A Second Vindication of the

what truth there is in what he here pretends, viz. that
though the one article, That Jesus is the Messiah, be
mentioned " alone in some places, yet we have reason
" to be persuaded, from the conciseness of the " scrip
ture history, that there were, at the same time, joined
with it other necessary articles of faith, in the preaching
of our Saviour and his apostles.

It is to be observed, that the unrnasker builds upon
this false supposition, that in some places, other neces
sary articles of faith, joined with that of Jesus the
Messiah, are by the evangelists mentioned to be pro
posed by our Saviour and his apostles, as necessary to
be believed to make those they preached to Christians.
For his saying, that in some places, that " one neces-
" sary article is mentioned alone," implies, that in other
places it is not mentioned alone, but joined with other
necessary articles. But then it will remain upon him
to show,

XXXVI. " In what place, either of the Gospels or
" of the Acts, other articles of faith are joined
" with this, and proposed as necessary to be be-
" lieved to make men Christians."

The unmasker, it is probable, will tell us, that the
article of Christ's resurrection is sometimes joined with
this of the Messiah, as particularly in that first sermon
of St. Peter, Acts ii. by which there were three thou
sand added to the church at one time. Ansvv. This
sermon, well considered, will explain to us both the
preaching of the apostles ; what it was that they pro
posed to their unbelieving auditors, to make them chris-
tians ; and also the manner of St. Luke's recording
their sermons. It is true, that here are delivered by St.
Peter many other matters of faith, besides that of Jesus
being the Messiah ; for all that he said, being of divine
authority, is matter of faith, and may not be disbeliev
ed. The first part of his discourse is to prove to the
Jews, that what they had observed of extraordinary at
that time, amongst the disciples, who spake variety of
tongues, did not proceed from wine, but from the Holy

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 321

Ghost; and that this was the pouring1 out of the Spirit,
prophesied of by the prophet Joel. This is all matter
of faith, and is written, that it might be believed : but
yet I think, that neither the unmasker, nor any body
else will say, that this is such a necessary article of faith,
that no man could, without an explicit belief of it, be
a Christian ; though, being a declaration of the Holy
Ghost by St. Peter, it is so much a matter of faith, that
no-body to whom it is now proposed, can deny it, and
be a Christian. And thus all the scripture of the New
Testament, given by divine inspiration, is matter of
faith, and necessary to be believed by all Christians, to
whom it is proposed. But yet I do not think any one
so unreasonable as to say, that every proposition in the
New Testament is a fundamental article of faith, which
is required explicitly to be believed to make a man a
Christian.

Here now is a matter of faith joined, in the same
sermon, with this fundamental article, that " Jesus is
" the Messiah ; " and reported by the sacred historian
so at large, that it takes up a third part of St. Peter's
sermon, recorded by St. Luke : and yet it is such a
matter of faith, as is not contained in the unmasker 's
catalogue of necessary articles. I must ask him then,
whether St. Luke were so concise an historian, that he
would so at large set down a matter of faith, proposed
by St. Peter, that was not necessary to be believed to
make a man a Christian, and wholly leave out the very
mention of all the unmasker's additional necessary ar
ticles, if indeed they were necessary to be believed to
make men Christians ? I know not how any one could
charge the historian with greater unfaithfulness, or
greater folly. But this the unmasker sticks not at, to
preserve to himself the power of appointing what shall,
and what shall not, be necessary articles : and of mak
ing his system the Christianity necessary, and only ne
cessary to be received.

The next thing that St. Peter proceeds to, in this his
sermon, is, to declare to the unbelieving jews that Jesus
of Nazareth, who had done miracles amongst them,

y

A Second Vindication of the

whom they had crucified, and put to death, and whom
God had raised again from the dead, was the Messiah.

Here indeed our Saviour's crucifixion, death, and re
surrection, are mentioned: and if they were no- where
else recorded, are matters of faith ; which, with all the
rest of the New Testament, ought to be believed by
every Christian, to whom it is thus proposed, as a part
of divine revelation. But that these were not here
proposed to the unbelieving jews, as the fundamental
articles, which St. Peter principally aimed at, and en
deavoured to convince them of, is evident from hence,
that they are made use of, as arguments to persuade them
of this fundamental truth, viz. that Jesus was the Messiah,
whom they ought to take for their Lord and Ruler.
For whatsoever is brought as an argument, to prove
another truth, cannot be thought to be the principal
thing aimed at, in that argumentation ; though it may
have so strong and immediate a connection with the

o

conclusion, that you cannot deny it, without denying
even what is inferred from it, and is therefore the fitter
to be an argument to prove it. But that our Saviour's
crucifixion,, death, and resurrection, were used here as
arguments to persuade them into a belief of this funda
mental article, that Jesus was the Messiah, and not as
propositions of a new faith they were to receive, is evi
dent from hence, that St. Peter preached here to those
who knew the death and crucifixion of Jesus as well as
he ; and therefore these could not be proposed to them,
as new articles of faith to be believed ; but those matters
of fact being what the jews knew already, were a good
argument, joined with his resurrection, to convince
them of that truth, which he endeavoured to give them
a belief of. And therefore he rightly inferred, from
these facts joined together, this conclusion, the believing
whereof would make them Christians : " Therefore let
" all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath
" made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified,
" Lord and Christ." To the making good this sole
proposition, his whole discourse tended : this was the
sole truth he laboured to convince them of; this the

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 323

faith he endeavoured to bring- them into ; which as soon
as they had received with repentance, they were by
baptism admitted into the church, and three thousand
at once were made Christians.

Here St. Luke's own confession, without that " of in-
" telligent and observing men," which the unmasker
has recourse to, might have satisfied him again, " that
" in relating matters of fact, many passages were omit-
" ted by the sacred penmen/' For, says St. Luke here,
ver. 40, " And with many other words," which are not
set down.

One would, at first sight, wonder why the unmasker
neglects these demonstrative authorities of the holy pert-
meri themselves, where they own their omissions, to
tell us, that it is " confessed by all intelligent and ob-
" serving men, that in relating matters of fact, many
" passages were omitted by the sacred penmen." St.
John, in what he says of his gospel, directly professes
large omissions, and so does St. Luke here. But these
omissions would not serve the unmasker's turn ; for they
are directly against him, and what he would have : and
therefore he had reason to pass them by. For St. John,
in that passage above cited, chap. xx. 30, 31, tells us,
that how much soever he had left out of his history, he
had inserted that which was enough to be believed to
eternal life : " but these are written, that ye might be-
" lieve, and believing, ye might have life." But this
is not all he assures us of, viz. that he had recorded all
that was necessary to be believed to eternal life : but
he, in express words, tells us what is that ALL, that is
necessary to be believed to eternal life : and for the proof
of which proposition alone, he writ all the rest of his
gospel, viz. that we might believe. What? even this:
" That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God," and that,
believing this, we " might have life through his name."
This may serve as a key to us, in reading the history
of the New Testament ; and show us why this article,
that Jesus was the Messiah, is no- where omitted,
though a great part of the arguments used, to convince
men of it, nay, very often the whole discourse, made
to lead men into the belief of it, be intirely omitted.

Y 2

324 A Second Vindication of the

The Spirit of God directed them everywhere to set
down the article, which was absolutely necessary to be
believed to make men Christians ; so that that could no
ways be doubted of, nor mistaken : but the arguments
and evidences, which were to lead men into this
faith, would be sufficient, if they were once found any
where, though scattered here and there, in those writ
ings, whereof that infallible Spirit was the author.
This preserved the decorum used in all histories, and
avoided those continual, large, and unnecessary repeti
tions, which our critical unmasker might have called
tedious, with juster reason than he does the repetition
of this short proposition, that Jesus is the Messiah ;
which I set down no oftener in my book, than the Holy
Ghost thought fit to insert it in the history of the New
Testament, as concise as it is. But this, it seems to our
nice unmasker, is " tedious, tedious and offensive."
And if a Christian, and a successor of the apostles, can
not bear the being so often told, what it was that our
Saviour and his apostles every-where preached to the
believers of one God, though it be contained in one
short proposition ; what cause of exception arid disgust
would it have been to heathen readers, some whereof
might, perhaps, have been as critical as the unmasker,
if this sacred history had, in every page, been filled with
the repeated discourses of the apostles, all of them every
where to the same purpose, viz. to persuade men to be
lieve, that Jesus was the Messiah? It was necessary, even
by the laws of history, as often as their preaching any
where was mentioned, to tell to what purpose they
spoke ; which being always to convince men of this one
fundamental truth, it is no wonder we find it so often
repeated. But the arguments and reasonings with
which this one point is urged, are, as they ought to be,
in most places, left out. A constant repetition of them
had been superfluous, and consequently might justly
have been blamed as " tedious." But there is enough
recorded abundantly to convince any rational man, any
one riot wilfully blind, that he is that promised Saviour.
And, in this, we have a reason of the omissions in the
history of the New Testament ; which were no other

Reasonableness of Christianity > &;c. 325

than such as became prudent, as well as faithful writers.
Much less did that conciseness (with which the uiimasker
would cover his bold censure of the Gospels and the
Acts, and, as it seems, lay them by with contempt) make
the holy writers omit any thing, in the preaching of
our Saviour and his apostles, absolutely necessary to
be known and believed to make men Christians.

Conformable hereunto, we shall find St. Luke writes
his history of the Acts of the Apostles. In the begin
ning of it, he sets down at large some of the discourses
made to the unbelieving jews. But in most other
places, unless it be where there was something particular
in the circumstances of the matter, he contents himself
to tell to what purpose they spoke : which was every
where only this, that Jesus was the Messiah. Nay,
St. Luke, in the first speech of St. Peter, Acts ii. which
he thought fit to give us a great part of, yet owns the
omission of several things that the apostle said. For,
having expressed this fundamental doctrine, that Jesus
was the Messiah, and recorded several of the arguments
wherewith St. Peter urged it, for the conversion of the
unbelieving jews, his auditors, he adds, ver. 40, " And
" with many other words did he testify and exhort,
" saying, Save yourselves from this untoward genera
" tion." Here he confesses, that he omitted a great deal
which St. Peter had said to persuade them, To what?
To that which, in other words, he had just said before,
ver. 38, " Repent and be baptized every one of you in
" the name of Jesus Christ," i. e. Believe Jesus to be
the Messiah, take him as such for your Lord and King,
and reform your lives by a sincere resolution of obe
dience to his laws.

Thus we have an account of the omissions in the re
cords of matters of fact in the New Testament. But
will the unmasker say, That the preaching of those
articles that he has given us, as necessary to be believed
to make a man a Christian, was part of those matters of
fact, which have been omitted in the history of the New
Testament ? Can any one think3 that " the corruption
" and degeneracy of human nature, with the true
" original of it, (the defection of our first parents,) the

326 A Second Vindication of the

" propagation of sin and mortality, our restoration and
" reconciliation by Christ's blood, the eminency and
" excellency of his priesthood, the efficacy of his death,
" the full satisfaction thereby made to divine justice,
" and his being made an all-sufficient sacrifice for sin,
" our justification by Christ's righteousness, election,
" adoption," &c. were all proposed, and that too, in
the sense of our author's system, by our Saviour and his
apostles, as fundamental articles of faith, necessary to
be explicitly believed by every man, to make him a
Christian, in all their discourses to unbelievers; and yet
that the inspired penmen of those histories every-where
left the mention of these fundamental articles wholly
out ? This would have been to have writ, not a concise,
but an imperfect history of all that Jesus and his apostles
taught.

What an account would it have been of the gospel, as
it was first preached and propagated, if the greatest part
of the necessary doctrines of it were wholly left out, and
a man could not find, from one end to the other of this
whole history, that religion which is necessary to be be
lieved to make a man a Christian? And yet this is that,
which, under the notion of their being concise, the un-
masker would persuade us to have been done by St. Luke
and the other evangelists, in their histories. And it is
no less than what he plainly says, in his " Thoughts
" concerning the causes of atheism," p. 109, where, to
aggravate my fault, in passing by the epistles, and to
show the necessity of searching in them for fundamen
tals, he in words blames me ; but in effect condemns the
sacred history contained in the Gospels and the Acts.
" It is most evident," says he, " to any thinking man,
" that the author of the Reasonableness of Christianity,
" purposely omits the epistolary writings of the apostles,
" because they are fraught with other fundamental
" doctrines,, besides that one which he mentions. There
" we are instructed concerning these grand heads of
" Christian divinity." Here, i. e. in the epistles, says
he, " there are discoveries concerning satisfaction,"
&c. And, in the close of his list of grand heads, as
he calls them, some whereof I have above set down out

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 327

of him, he adds, " These are the matters of faith con-
" tained in the epistles." By all which expressions he
plainly signifies, that these, which he calls fundamental
doctrines, are none of those we are instructed in, in the
Gospels and the Acts ; that they are not discovered nor
contained in the historical writings of the evangelists :
whereby he confesses, that either our Saviour and his
apostles did not propose them in their preachings to
their unbelieving hearers ; or else, that the several
faithful writers of their history, wilfully, i. e. unfaith
fully, every- where omitted them in the account they
have left us of those preachings ; which could scarce
possibly be done by them all, and every-where, without
an actual combination amongst them, to smother the
greatest and most material parts of our Saviour's and
his apostles 'discourses. For what else did they, if all that
the unmasker has set down in his list be fundamental
doctrines ; every one of them absolutely necessary to be
believed to make a man a Christian, which our Saviour
and his apostles every-where preached, to make men
Christians ? but yet St. Luke, and the other evangelists,
by a very guilty and unpardonable conciseness, every
where omitted them, and throughout their whole
history, never once tell us, they were so much as pro
posed, much less, that they were those articles which
the apostles laboured to establish and convince men of
every-where, before they admitted them to baptism ?
Nay the far greatest part of them, the history they writ
does not any- where so much as once mention ? Flow,
after such an imputation as this, the unmasker will clear
himself from laying by the four Gospels and the Acts
with contempt, let him look ; if my not collecting fun
damentals out of the epistles had that guilt in it. For
I never denied all the fundamental doctrines to be there,
but only said, that there they were not easy to be found
out, and distinguished from doctrines not fundamental.
Whereas our good unmasker charges the historical
books of the New Testament with a total omission of
the far greatest part of those fundamental doctrines of
Christianity, which he says, are absolutely necessary to
be believed to make a man a Christian.

328 A Second Vindication of the

To convince the reader what was absolutely required
to be believed to make a man a Christian, and thereby
clear the holy writers from the un masker's slander, any
one need but look a little farther into the history of the
Acts, and observe St. Luke's method in the writing of
it. In the beginning (as we observed before), and in
some few other places, he sets down at large the dis
courses made by the preachers of Christianity, to their
unbelieving auditors. But in the process of his history,
he generally contents himself to relate* what it was their
discourses drive at ; what was the doctrine they endea
voured to convince their unbelieving hearers of, to
make them believers. This we may observe, is never
omitted. This is every-where set down. Thus, Acts
v. 42, he tells us, that " daily in the temple, and in
" every house, the apostles ceased not to teach, and to
" preach JESUS THE MESSIAH." The particulars of
their discourses he omits, and the arguments they used
to induce men to believe, he omits ; but never fails to
inform us carefully, what it was the apostles taught and
preached, and would have men believe. The account
he gives us of St. Paul's preaching at Thessalonica,
is this : That " three sabbath-days he REASONED with
" the jews 'out of the scriptures, OPENING and AL-
" LEGiNGj that the Messiah must needs have suffered,,
" and risen again from the dead ; and that Jesus was
" the Messiah ; Acts xvii. 2, 3. At Corinth, that he
" REASONED in the synagogue every sabbath, and PER-
" SUADED the jews and the Greeks, and TESTIFIED
" that Jesus was the Messiah ; " xviii. 4, 5. That
" Apollos mightily convinced the jews, SHOWING BY
" THE SCRIPTURES, that Jesus was the Messiah ; "
xviii. 28.

By these, and the like places, we may be satisfied
what it was, that the apostles taught and preached, even
this one proposition, That Jesus was the Messiah : for
this was the sole proposition they reasoned about ; this
alone they testified, and they showed out of the scrip
tures ; and of this alone they endeavoured to convince
the jews and the Greeks, that believed one God. So
that it is plain from hence, that St. Luke omitted no-

Reasonableness of Christianity ', <§*c< 329

thing, that the apostles taught and preached ; none of
those doctrines that it was necessary to convince unbe
lievers of, to make them Christians ; though he, in most
places, omitted, as was fit, the passages of scripture
which they alleged, and the arguments those inspired
preachers used to persuade men to believe and embrace
that doctrine.

Another convincing argument, to show that St. Luke
omitted none of those fundamental doctrines, which the
apostles any-where proposed as necessary to be believed,
is from that different account he gives us of their
preaching in other places, and to auditors otherwise
disposed. Where the apostles had to do with idolatrous
heathens, who were not yet come to the knowledge of
the only true God, there, he tells us, they proposed
also the article of the one invisible God, maker of
heaven and earth : and this we find recorded in him
out of their preaching to the Lystrians, Acts xiv. and
to the Athenians, Acts xvii. In the latter of which
St. Luke, to convince his reader, that he, out of con
ciseness, omits none of those fundamental articles, that
were any-where proposed by the preachers of the gospel,
as necessary to be believed to make men Christians, sets
down not only the article of Jesus the Messiah, but
that also of the one invisible God, creator of all things ;
which, if any necessary one might, this of all other fun
damental articles might, by an author that affected
brevity, with the fairest excuse, have been omitted, as
being implied in that other, of the Messiah ordained by
God. Indeed in the story of what Paul and Barnabas
said at Lystra, the article of the Messiah is not mention
ed. Not that St. Luke omitted that fundamental arti
cle, where the apostles taught it : but, they having
here begun their preaching with that of the one living-
God, they had not, as appears, time to proceed farther,
and propose to them what yet remained to make them
Christians : all that they could do, at that time, was, to
hinder the people from sacrificing to them. And, be
fore we hear any more of their preaching, they were,
by the instigation of the jews, fallen upon, and Paul
stoned.

330 A Second Vindication of the

This, by the way, shows the unmasker's mistake in
his first particular, p. 74, where he says (as he does
here again, in the second particular, which we are now
examining-) that " believing Jesus to be the Messiah is
" the first step to Christianity ; and therefore this,
" rather than any other, was propounded to be be-
" lieved by all those, whom either our Saviour, or the
" apostles, invited to embrace Christianity." The
contrary whereof appears here ; where the article of
one God is proposed in the first place, to those whose
unbelief made such a proposal necessary. And there
fore, if his reason (which he uses again here, p. 76)
were good, viz. That the article of the Messiah is ex
pressly mentioned alone, " because it is a leading arti-
" cie, and makes way for the rest," this reason would
rather conclude for the article of one God ; and that
alone should be expressly mentioned, instead of the
other. Since, as he argues for the other, p. 74, " If
" they did not believe this, in the first place," viz.
that there was one God, " there could be no hopes
" that they would attend unto any other proposal, re-
" lating to the Christian religion. The vanity and
falsehood of which reasoning, viz. that " the article of
" Jesus the Messiah was every-where propounded, ra-
" ther than any other, because it was the leading arti-
" cle," we see in the history of St. Paul's preaching to
the Athenians. St. Luke mentions more than one arti
cle, where more than one was proposed by St. Paul ;
though the first of them was that leading article of one
God, which if not received, " in the first place3 there
" could be no hope they would attend to the rest."

Something the unmasker would make of this argu
ment, of a leading article, for want of a better, though
he knows not what. In his first particular, p. 74, he
makes use of it to show, why there was but that one
article proposed by the first preachers of the gospel ;
and how well that succeeds with him, we have seen.
For this is demonstration, that if there were but that
one proposed by our Saviour and the apostles, there
was but that one necessary to be believed to make men
Christians; unless he will impiously say, that our

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 331

Saviour and the apostles went about preaching to no
purpose : for if they proposed not all that was necessary
to make men Christians, it was in vain for them to
preach, and others to hear ; if when they heard and be
lieved all that was proposed to them, they were not yet
Christians: for if any article was omitted in the pro
posal, which was necessary to make a man a Christian,
though they believed all that was proposed to them,
they could not yet be Christians ; unless a man can, from
an infidel, become a Christian, without doing what was
necessary to make him a Christian.

Further, if his argument, of its being a leading arti
cle, proves, that that alone was proposed, it is a con
tradiction to give it as a reason, why it was set down
alone by the historian, where it was not proposed alone
by the preacher, but other necessary " matters of faith
" were proposed with it ; " unless it can be true, that
this article, of " Jesus is the Messiah," was proposed
alone by our Saviour and his apostles, because it was a
leading article, and was mentioned alone in the history
of what they preached, because it was a leading article,
though it were not proposed alone, but jointly with
other necessary matters of faith. For this is the use he
makes here again, p. 76, of his leading article, under
his second particular, viz. to show why the historians
mentioned this necessary article of Jesus the Messiah
alone, in places where the preachers of the gospel pro
posed it not alone, but with other necessary articles.
But, in this latter case, it has no show of a reason at
all. It may be granted as reasonable for the teachers
of any religion not to go any farther, where they see
the first article which they propose is rejected ; where
the leading truth, on which all the rest depends, is not
received. But it can be no reason at all for an historian,
who writes the history of these first preachers, to set
down only the first and leading article, and omit all the
rest, in instances where more were not only proposed,
but believed and embraced, and upon that the hearers
and believers admitted into the church. It is not for
historians to put any distinction between leading, or

A Second Vindication of the

not leading articles ; but, if they will give a true and
useful account of the religion, whose original they are
writing, and of the converts made to it, they must tell,
not one, but all those necessary articles, upon assent to
which, converts were baptized into that religion, and
admitted into the church. Whoever says otherwise,
accuses them of falsifying the story, misleading the rea
ders, and giving a wrong account of the religion which
they pretend to teach the world, and to preserve and
propagate to future ages. This (if it were so) no pre
tence of conciseness could excuse or palliate.

There is yet remaining one consideration, which were
sufficient of itself to convince us, that it was the sole
article of faith which was preached ; and that if there
had been other articles necessary to be known and be
lieved by converts, they could not, upon any pretence
of conciseness, be supposed to be omitted : and that is
the commissions of those, that were sent to preach the
gospel. Which since the sacred historians mention.,
they cannot be supposed to leave out any of the mate
rial and main heads of those commissions.

St. Luke records it, chap. iv. 43, that our Saviour
says of himself, ** I must go into the other towns to
" tell the good news of the kingdom ; for (a? TSTO)
" upon this errand am I SENT/' This St. Mark calls
simply preaching. This preaching, what it contained,
St. Matthew tells us, chap. iv. 23, " And Jesus went
" about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and
" preaching the good news of the kingdom, and heal-
" ing all manner of sickness and all manner of diseases
" among the people." Here we have his commission,
or end of his being sent, and the execution of it ; both
terminating in this, that he declared the good news, that
the kingdom of the Messiah was come ; and gave them
to understand by the miracles he did, that he himself
was he. Nor does St. Matthew seem to affect such
conciseness, that he would have left it out, if the gospel
had contained any other fundamental parts necessary
to be believed to make men Christians. For he here
says, " All manner of sickness, and all manner of dis-

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 383

" eases," when either of them might have been better
left out, than any necessary article of the gospel, to make
his history concise.

We see what our Saviour was sent for. In the next
place, let us look into the commission he gave the
apostles, when he sent them to preach the gospel. We
have it in the tenth of St. Matthew, in these words :
" Go not into the way of the gentiles, and into any
" city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather
" to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye

" go, PREACH, SAYING, THE KINGDOM of HEAVEN

" is AT HAND. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers,
t( raise the dead, cast out devils : freely have ye re-
" ceived, freely give. Provide neither gold, nor silver,
" nor brass in your purses, nor scrip in your journey ;
" neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves, (for
" the workman is worthy of his meat.) And into
" whatsoever city, or town, ye shall enter, inquire who
" in it is worthy, and there abide until ye go thence.
u And when ye come into any house salute it. And
" if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it ;
" and if it be not worthy, let your peace return to
" you. And whosoever shall not receive you, nor
" hear your words ; when ye depart out of that house,
" or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I
" say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for the land
" of Sodom and Gornorrha, in the day of judgment,
" than for that city. Behold I send you forth as sheep,
" in the midst of wolves : be ye therefore wise as ser-
" pents, and harmless as doves. But beware of men ;
" for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they
" will scourge you in their synagogues. And ye shall
" be brought before governors and kings for my sake,
" for a testimony against them and the gentiles. But
" when they deliver you up, take no thought, how or
" what ye shall speak : for it shall be given you in that
" same hour, what ye shall speak. For it is not ye
" that speak, but the spirit of your Father, which
" speaketh in you. And the brother shall deliver up
" the brother to death, and the father the child, and
" the children shall rise up against the parents, and
" cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated

334 A Second Vindication of the

" of all men, for my name's sake : but he that en-
" dureth to the end shall he saved. But when they per-
" secute you in this city, flee ye into another; for verily
66 I say unto you, ye shall not have gone over the cities
" of Israel until the Son of man be come. The disciple
" is not above his master, nor the servant above his
" lord. It is enough for the disciple, that he be as
" his master, and the servant as his lord. If they have
" called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much
" more shall they call them of his household ? Fear them
" not therefore ; for there is nothing covered, which
" shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be
t( known. What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in
" light ; and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye
" upon the house-tops. And fear not them which kill
" the body, but are not able to kill the soul : but rather
" fear him, which is able to destroy both soul and body
" in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing ?
" And one of them shall not fall to the ground without
" your Father. But the very hairs of your head are all
" numbered. Fear ye* not therefore ; ye are of more
" value than many sparrows. Whosoever therefore shall
" confess me before men, him will I confess also before
" my Father, which is in heaven. But whosoever shall
" deny me before men, him will I also deny before my
" Father, which is in heaven. Think not that I am
u come to send peace on earth : I came not to send
66 peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at
" variance against his father, and the daughter against
" her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her
" mother-in-law. And a man's foes shall be they of
" his own household- He that loveth father and mo-
" ther more than me, is not worthy of me ; and he that
" loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy
" of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and fol-
" loweth after me, is not worthy of me. He that
" iindeth his life shall lose it : and he that loseth his
44 life for my sake, shall find it. He that receiveth you,
" receiveth me : and he that receiveth me, receiveth
" him that sent me. He that receiveth a prophet in
" the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's re-
<* ward ; and he that receiveth a righteous man in the

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 335

" name of a righteous man, shall receive a righteous
" man's reward. And whosoever shall give to drink
" unto one of these little ones, a cup of cold water
" only, in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you,
" he shall in no wise lose his reward. And it came to
" pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding

" his twelve disciples "

This is the commission our Saviour gave his apostles,
when he sent them abroad to recover and save " the
" lost sheep of the house of Israel." And will any of
the unmasker's intelligent and observing men say., that
the history of the " scripture is so concise, that any
" passages," any essential, any material, nay, any parts
at all of the apostles commission, " are here omitted by
" the sacred penman ? " This commission is set down
so at full, and so particularly,, that St. Matthew, who
was one of them to whom it was given, seems not to
have left out one word of all that our Saviour gave him
in charge. And it is so large, even to every particular
article of their instructions, that I doubt not, but my
citing so much, " verbatim," out of the sacred text,
will here again be troublesome to the unmasker. But
whether he will venture again to call it tedious, must be
as nature or caution happen to have the better on n.
Can any one, who reads this commission, unless he hath
the brains, as well as the brow of an un masker, allege,
that the conciseness of the history of the scripture has
concealed from us those fundamental doctrines, which
our Saviour and his apostles preached ; but the sacred
historians thought fit by consent, for unconceivable
reasons, to leave out in the narrative they give us of
those preachings ? This passage here., wholly confuteth
that. They could preach nothing but what they were
sent to preach : and that we see is contained in these few
words, " preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at
" hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the
" dead, cast out devils;" i. e. acquaint them, that the
kingdom of the Messiah is come, and let them know,
by the miracles that you do in my name, that I am that
King and Deliverer they expect. If there were any
other necessary articles that were to be believed, for the

336 A Second Vindication of the

saving of the lost sheep they were sent to, can one
think that St. Matthew, who sets down so minutely
every circumstance of their commission, would have
omitted the most important and material of it ? He
was an ear-witness, and one that was sent : and so
(without supposing him inspired) could not be misled
by the short account he might receive from others, who
by their own, or others forgetfulness, might have drop
ped those other fundamental articles, that the apostles
were ordered to preach.

The very like account St. Luke gives of our Saviour's
commission to the seventy, chap. x. 1 — 16, "After
" these things the Lord appointed other seventy also,
" and sent them two and two before his face, into every
" city and place, whither he himself would come.
" Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is
" great, but the labourers are few : pray ye therefore
" the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth
" labourers into his harvest. Go your ways : behold I
" send you forth as lambs among wolves. Carry neither
" purse, nor scrip, nor shoes : and salute no man by the
" way. And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say,
" Peace be to this house. And if the Son of peace be
66 there, your peace shall rest upon it; if not, it shall re-
" turn to you again. And in the same house remain,
<( eating and drinking such things as they give : for
" the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house
" to house. And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they
" receive you, eat such things as are set before you.
" And healthesickthataretherein.and SAY UNTO THEM,

" THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS COME NIGH UNTO YOU.

" But into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive

" you not, go your ways out into the streets of the

" same, and say, even the very dust of your city, which

" cleaveth on us, we do wipe off against you ; notwith-

" standing, be ye sure of this, that the kingdom of God

" is come nigh unto you. But I say unto you, that it

" shall be more tolerable, in that day, for Sodom, than

" for that city. Woe unto thee, Chorazin ! Woe unto

" thee, Bethsaida ! For if the mighty works had been

" done in Tyre and Si don, which have been done in

Reasonableness of Christianity 9 8$c. 337

" you, they had a great while ago repented sitting in
" sackcloth and ashes. But it shall be more tolerable
" for Tyre and Sidon, at the day of judgment, than
" for you. And thou Capernaum, which art exalted
" to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell. He that
" heareth you, heareth me : and he that despiseth you,
" despiseth me : and he that despiseth me, despiseth
" him that sent me."

Our Saviour's commission here to the seventy, whom
he sent to preach, is so exactly conformable to that
which he had before given to the twelve apostles, that
there needs but this one thing more to be observed, to
convince any one that they were sent to convert their
hearers to this sole belief, That the kingdom of the
Messiah was come, and that Jesus was the Messiah :
and that the historians of the New Testament are not
so concise in their account of this matter, that they
would have omitted any other necessary articles of be
lief, that had been given to the seventy in commission.
That which I mean is, the kingdom of the Messiah is
twice mentioned in it to be come, verse 9 and 11. If
there were other articles given them by our Saviour, to
propose to their hearers, St. Luke must be very fond of
this one article, when, for conciseness sake, leaving out
the other fundamental articles, that our Saviour gave
them in charge to preach, he repeats this more than
once.

The unmasker's third particular, p. 76, begins thus :
" This also must be thought of, that though there are
" several parts and members of the Christian faith, yet
" they do not all occur in any one place of scripture."
Something is in it, (whether owing to his will or under
standing, I shall not inquire,) that the unmasker al
ways delivers himself in doubtful and ambiguous terms.
It had been as easy for him to have said, " There are
" several articles of the Christian faith necessary to be
" believed to make a man a Christian," as to say, (as
he does here,) " There are several parts and members
" of the Christian faith." But as an evidence of the
clearness of his notions, or the fairness of his arguing, he
always rests in generals. There arc, I grant, several

338 A Second Vindication of the

parts and members of the Christian faith, which do no
more occur in any one place of scripture, than the whole
New Testament can be said to occur in any one place
of scripture. For every proposition, delivered in the
New Testament for divine revelation, is " a part and
" member of the Christian faith." But it is not those
" parts and members of the Christian faith" we are
speaking of; but only such " parts and members of
" the Christian faith," as are absolutely necessary to be
believed by every man, before he can be a Christian.
And in that sense I deny his assertion to be true, viz.
that they do not occur in any one place of the scripture:
for they do all occur in that first sermon of St. Peter,
Acts ii. 36, by which three thousand were at that time
brought into the church, and that in these words :
" therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly,
" that God hath made that same Jesus, whom you have
" crucified, Lord and Christ. Repent, and be bap-
" tized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ."
Here is the doctrine of Jesus the Messiah, the Lord, and
of repentance, proposed to those, who already believe
one God : which, I say, are all the parts of the Christian
faith necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian.
To suppose, as the unmasker does here, that more is re
quired, is to beg, not to prove the question.

If he disputes this collection of mine out of that ser
mon of St. Peter, I will give him a more authentic
collection of the necessary parts of the Christian faith,
from an author that he will not question. Let him look
into Acts xx. 20, &c. and there he will find St. Paul
saying thus to the elders of Ephesus, whom he was
taking his last leave of, with an assurance that he should
never see them again : " I have kept back nothing that
" was profitable unto you ; but have showed you, and
" have taught you publicly, and from house to house,
" testifying both to the jews, and also to the Greeks, re-
" pentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord
" Jesus Christ." If St. Paul knew what was neces
sary to make a Christian, here it is : here he (if he
knew how to do it, tor it is plain from his words he
designed to do it) has put it together. But there is a

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 339

greater yet than St. Paul, who has brought all the parts
of faith necessary to salvation into one place ; I mean
our Saviour himself, John xvii. 13, in these words:
" This is life eternal, that they might know thee the
" only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast
" sent."

But the unmasker goes on : " Therefore, when, in
" some places, only one single part of the Christian
" faith is made mention of, as necessary to be em-
" braced in order to salvation, we must be careful not
" to take it alone, but to supply it from several other
" places, which make mention of other necessary and
" indispensable points of belief. I will give the reader
" a plain instance of this, Rom. x. 9, " if thou shalt
" believe in thine heart, that God hath raised him
" (i. e. the Lord Jesus) from the dead, thou shalt be
" saved." Here one article of faith, viz. the belief of
" Christ's resurrection (because it is of so great impor-
" tance in Christianity) is only mentioned : but all the
" rest must be supposed, because they are mentioned
" in other places."

Answ. One would wonder that any one conversant in
holy writ, with ever so little attention, much more that
an expounder of the scriptures, should so mistake the
sense and style of the scripture. Believing Jesus to be
the Messiah, with a lively faith, i. e. as I have showed,
taking him to be our King, with a sincere submission,
to the laws of his kingdom, is all that is required to
make a man a Christian ; for this includes repentance j
too. The believing him therefore to be the Messiah is
very often, and with great reason, put both for faith
and repentance too : which are sometimes set down
singly, where one is put for both, as implying the
other ; and sometimes they are both mentioned ; and
then faith, as contradistinguished to repentance, is taken
for a simple assent of the mind to this truth, that Jesus
is the Messiah. Now this faith is variously expressed
in scripture.

There are some particulars in the history of our
Saviour, allowed to be so peculiarly appropriated to the
Messiah, such incommunicable marks of him, that to

z Z

340 A Second Vindication of the

believe them of Jesus of Nazareth, was in effect the
same, as to believe him to be the Messiah, and so are
put to express it. The principal of these is his resur
rection from the dead ; which being the great and de
monstrative proof of his being the Messiah, it is not at all
strange, that the believing his resurrection should be put
for believing him to be the Messiah ; since the declaring
his resurrection, was declaring him to be the Messiah.
For thus St. Paul argues, Acts xiii. 32, 33, " We de-
" clare unto you good tidings, or we preach the gospel
" to you [for so the word signifies], how that the pro-
" mise, that was made unto the fathers, God hath ful-
" filled the same unto us their children, in that he hath
" raised up Jesus again." The force of which argu
ment lies in this, that, if Jesus was raised from the dead,
then he was certainly the Messiah: and thus the promise
of the Messiah was fulfilled, in raising Jesus from the
dead. The like argument St. Paul useth, 1 Cor. xv. 17,
" If Christ be not raised, your faith is vain, you are yet
" in your sins ;" i. e. if Jesus be not risen from the
dead, he is not the Messiah, your believing it is in vain,
and you will receive no benefit by that faith. And so,
likewise, from the same argument of his resurrection, he
at Thessalonica proves him to be the Messiah, Acts xvii.
2, 3. " And Paul, as his manner was, went into the sy-
" nagogue, and three sabbath-days reasoned with the
" jews out of the scriptures, opening and alleging, that
" the Messiah must needs have suffered and risen again
" from the dead ; and that this Jesus, whom I preach
" unto you, is the Messiah."

The necessary connection of these two, that if he rose
from the dead, he was the Messiah ; and if he rose not
from the dead, he was not the Messiah ; the chief priest
and pharisees, that had prosecuted him to death, under
stood very well : who therefore " came together unto
" Pilate, saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver
" said, whilst he was yet alive, After three days I will
" rise again. Command, therefore, that the sepulchre
" be made sure unto the third day, lest his disciples
" come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the
" people, " He is risen from the dead:" " so the last

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 341

" errour shall be worse than the first." The errour
they here speak of, it is plain, was the opinion, that
he was the Messiah. To stop that belief, which his
miracles had procured him amongst the people, they had
got him put to death ; but if, after that, it should be
believed, that he rose again from the dead, this demon
stration, that he was the Messiah, would but establish
what they had laboured to destroy by his death ; since
no one, who believed his resurrection, could doubt of
his being the Messiah.

It is not at all therefore to be wondered, that his re
surrection, his ascension, his rule and dominion, and
his coming to judge the quick and the dead, which are
characteristical marks of the Messiah, and belong pe
culiarly to him, should sometimes in scripture be put
alone, as sufficient descriptions of the Messiah ; and the
believing them of him put for believing him to be the
Messiah. Thus, Acts x. our Saviour, in Peter's dis
course to Cornelius, when he brought him the gospel, is
described to be the Messiah, by his miracles, death,
resurrection, dominion, and coming to judge the quick
and the dead.

These, (which in my " Reasonableness of christiani-
" ty," I have upon this ground taken the liberty to call
concomitant articles,) where they are set alone for the
faith to which salvation is promised, plainly signify the
believing Jesus to be the Messiah, that fundamental
article, which has the promise of life ; and so give no
foundation at all for what the unmasker says, in these
words : " Here one article of faith, viz. the belief of
" Christ's resurrection (because it is of so great import-
" ance in Christianity) is only mentioned ; but all the
" rest must be supposed, because they are mentioned
" in other places."

Answ. If all the rest be of absolute and indispensable
necessity to be believed to make a man a Christian, all
the rest are, every one of them, of equal importance.
For things of equal necessity, to any end, are of equal
importance to that end. But here the truth forced its
way unawares from the unmasker : Our Saviour's resur
rection, for the reason I have given, is truly of great

342 A Second Vindication of the

importance in Christianity ; so great, that his being, or
not being the Messiah, stands or falls with it : so that
these two important articles are inseparable, and in
effect make but one. For, since that time> believe one,
and you believe both ; deny one of them, and you can
believe neither. If the unmasker can show me any one
of the articles in his list, which is not of this great im
portance, mentioned alone, with a promise of salvation
for believing it, I will grant him to have some colour
for what he says here. But where is to be found in the
scripture any such expression as this : if thou shalt be
lieve with thy heart " the corruption and degeneracy
" of human nature," thou shalt be saved ? or the like.
This place, therefore, out of the Romans, makes not
for, but against his list of necessary articles. One of
them, alone, he cannot show me any-where set down,
with a supposition of the rest, as having salvation pro
mised to it : though it be true, that that one, which
alone is absolutely necessary to be superadded to the
belief of one God, is, in divers places, differently ex
pressed.

That which he subjoins, as a consequence of what he
had said, is a farther proof of this : u And consequently,
" says he, 'if we would give an impartial account of our
" belief, we must consult those places : and they are
" not altogether, but dispersed here and there. Where-
" fore we must look them out, and acquaint ourselves
" writh the several particulars, which make up our be-
" lief, and render it intire and consummate."

Answ. Never was a man constanter to a loose way of
talking. The question is only about articles necessary
to be believed to make a man a Christian : and here he
talks of the " several particulars which make up our
" belief, and render it intire and consummate; " con
founding, as he did before, essential and integral parts,
which, it seems, he cannot distinguish. Our FaTfh is
true and saving, when it is such as God, by the new
covenant, requires it to be : but it is not intire and con
summate, until we explicitly believe all the truths con
tained in the word of God. For the whole revelation
of truth in the scripture being the proper and intire

Reasonableness of Christianity, <fyc.

object of faith, our faith cannot be intire and consum
mate, until it be adequate to its proper object, which is
the whole divine revelation contained in the scripture :
and so, to make our faith intire and consummate, we
must not look out those places, which, he says, are not
altogether. To talk of looking out, and culling of
places, is nonsense, where the whole scripture alone can
" make up our belief, and render it intire and consum-
" mate :" which no one, I think, can hope for, in this
frail state of ignorance and errour. * To make the un-
masker speak sense and to the purpose here, we must
understand him thus : " That if we will give an impar-
" tiai account " of the articles, that are necessary to be
believed to make a man a Christian, " we must con-
" suit those places where they are ; for they are not all
" together, but dispersed here and there ; wherefore we
" must look them out," and acquaint ourselves with the
several particulars, which make up the fundamental
articles of our belief, and will render a catalogue of
them intire and consummate. If his supposition be
true, I grant his method to be reasonable, and upon
that I join issue with him. Let him thus " give an
" impartial account of our belief; let him acquaint us
" with the several particulars which make up a
" Christian's belief, and render it intire and consum-
" mate." Until he has done this, let him not talk
thus in the air of a method, that will not do : let him
not reproach me, as he does, for not taking a course,
by which he himself cannot do, what he reviles me for
failing in. " But our hasty author," says he, " took
" another course, and thereby deceived himself, and
" unhappily deceived others." If it be so, I desire the
unmasker to take the course he proposes, and thereby
undeceive me and others ; and " acquaint us with the
" several particulars which make up a Christian's be-
" lief, and render it intire and consummate ; " for I am
willing to be undeceived : but until he has done that,
and shown us by the success of it, that his course is
better, he cannot blame us for following that course we
have done.

I come now to his fourth and last particular, p. 78,

344 A Second Vindication of the

which, he says, is the main answer to the objection ;
and therefore I shall set it down in his own words, in-
tire, as it stands together. " This," says he, " must
" be born in our minds, that Christianity was erected
" by degrees, according* to that prediction and promise
" of our Saviour, that " the Spirit should teach them
" all things." John xiv. 26. and that " he should
" guide them into all truth." John xvi. 13. viz.
" after his departure and ascension, when the Holy
" Ghost was to be sent in a special manner, to en-
" lighten men's minds, and to discover to them the
" great mysteries of Christianity. This is to be noted by
t us, as that which gives great light in the present case.
" The discovery of the doctrines of the gospel was
'' gradual. It was by certain steps that Christianity
" climbed to its height. We are riot to think then,
" that all the necessary doctrines of the Christian re-
" ligion were clearly published to the world in our
" Saviour's time. Not but that all that were necessary
" for that time were published, but some which were
" necessary for the succeeding one, were not then dis-
" covered, or, at least, not fully. They had ordinarily
" no belief, before Christ's death and resurrection, of
'• those substantial articles, i. e. that he should die and
" rise again : but we read in the Acts, and in the
" epistles, that these were formal articles of faith after-
" wards, and are ever since necessary to complete the
" Christian belief. So as to other great verities, the
" gospel increased by degrees, and was not perfect at
" once. Which furnishes us with a reason why most
" of the choicest and sublimest truths of Christianity are
" to be met with in the epistles of the apostles, they
" being such doctrines as were not clearly discovered
" and opened in the Gospels and the Acts." Thus far
the unmasker.

I thought hitherto, that the covenant of grace in
Christ Jesus had been but one, immutably the same :
but our unmasker here makes two, or I know not how
many. For I cannot tell how to conceive, that the
conditions of any covenant should be changed, and the
covenant remain the same ; every change of conditions,

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 345

in my apprehension, makes a new and another covenant.
We are not to think, says the unmasker, " That all the
" necessary doctrines of the Christian religion were
" clearly published to the world in our Saviour's time ;
" not but that all that were necessary for that time were
" published : but some, which were necessary for the
<c succeeding one, were not then discovered, or, at least,
" not fully." Answ. The unmasker, constant to him
self, speaks here doubtfully, and cannot tell whether he
should say, that the articles necessary to succeeding
times, were discovered in our Saviour's time, or no ;
and therefore, that he may provide himself a retreat, in
the doubt he is in, he says, " They were not clearly
" published ; they were not then discovered, or, at
" least, not fully." But we must desire him to pull off
his mask, and to that purpose,

1. I ask him how he can tell, that all the necessary
doctrines were obscuredly published, or in part disco
vered ? For an obscure publishing, a discovery in part,
is opposed to, and intimated in, " not clearly published,
" not fully discovered." And, if a clear and full disco
very be all that he denies to them, I ask,

XXXVIT. Which those fundamental articles are,
" which were obscurely published," but not fully
discovered in our Saviour's time ?

And next I shall desire him to tell me,

XXXVIII. Whether there are any articles necessary
to be believed to make a man a Christian, that were
not discovered at all in our Saviour's time : and
which they are?

If he cannot show these distinctly, it is plain he talks
at random about them ; but has no clear and distinct
conception of those that were published, or not publish
ed, clearly or obscurely discovered in our Saviour's
time. It was necessary for him to say something for
those his pretended necessary articles, which are not

346 A Second Vindication of the

to be found any-where proposed in the preaching of our
Saviour and his apostles, to their yet unbelieving audi
tors ; and therefore, he says, " We are not to think all
" the necessary doctrines of the Christian religion were
" clearly published to the world in our Saviour's time.'*
But he barely says it, without giving any reason, why
" we are not to think so." It is enough that it is ne
cessary to his hypothesis. He says, " we are not to
think so," and we are presently bound not to think so.
Else, from another man, that did not usurp an authority
over our thoughts, it would have required some reason
to make them think, that something more was re
quired to make a man a Christian after, than in our
Saviour's time. For, as I take it, it is not a very pro
bable, much less a self-evident proposition, to be re
ceived without proof, that there was something neces
sary for that time to make a man a Christian, and
something more, that was necessary to make a Christian
in the succeeding time.

However, since this great master says, " we ought
* to think so," let us in obedience think so as well as
we can ; until he vouchsafes to give us some reason to
think, that there was more required to be believed to
make a man a Christian, in the succeeding time, than
in our Saviour's. This,, instead of removing, does but
increase the difficulty : for if more were necessary to be
believed to make a man a Christian after our Saviour's
time, than was during his life ; how comes it, that no
more was proposed by the apostles, in their preaching
to unbelievers, for the making them Christians, after
our Saviour's death, than there was before ; even this
one article, " that he was the Messiah ? " For I desire
the unmasker to show me any of those articles men
tioned in his list, (except the resurrection and ascension
of our Saviour, which were intervening matters of fact,
evidencing him to be the Messiah,) that were proposed
by the apostles, after our Saviour's time, to their unbe
lieving hearers, to make them Christians. This one
doctrine, " That Jesus was the Messiah/' was that
which was proposed in our Saviour's time to be believ
ed, as necessary to make a man a Christian : the same

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 347

doctrine was, likewise, what was proposed afterwards,
in the preaching of the apostles to unbelievers, to make
them Christians.

I grant this was more clearly proposed after, than
in our Saviour's time : but in both of them it was all
that was proposed to the believers of one God, to make
them Christians. Let him show, that there were any
other proposed in, or after our Saviour's time, to be be
lieved to make unbelievers Christians. If he means,
by " necessary articles published to the world," the
other doctrines contained in the epistles ; I grant, they
are all of them necessary articles, to be believed by every
Christian, as far as he understands them. But I deny,
that they were proposed to those they were writ to, as
necessary to make them Christians, for this demon
strative reason ; because they were Christians already.
For example, Many doctrines proving, and explain-
ing, and giving a farther light into the gospel, are
published in the epistles to the Corinthians and Thes-
salonians. These are all of divine authority, and none
of them may be disbelieved by any one who is a
Christian ; but yet what was proposed or published to
both the Corinthians and Thessalonians, to make them
Christians was only this doctrine, " That Jesus was the
" Messiah : " as may be seen, Acts xvii. xviii. This,
then, was the doctrine necessary to make men Christians,
in our Saviour's time ; and this the only doctrine neces
sary to make unbelievers Christians, after our Saviour's
time. The only difference was, that it was more clearly
proposed after, than before his ascension : the reason
whereof has been sufficiently explained. But any other
doctrine but this, proposed clearly or obscurely, in or
after our Saviour's time, as necessary to be believed to
make unbelievers Christians, that remains yet to be
shown.

When the unmasker speaks of the doctrines that were
necessary for the succeeding time after our Saviour^ he
is in doubt, whether he should say they were, or were
not discovered, in our Saviour's time; and how far
they were then discovered : and therefore he says,
" Some of them were not then discovered, or at least,

348 A Second Vindication of the

" not fully." We must here excuse the doubtfulness
of his talking, concerning the discovery of his other ne
cessary articles. For how could he say, they were dis
covered, or not discovered, clearly or obscurely, fully or
not fully ; when he does not yet know them all, nor can
tell us, what those necessary articles are ? If he does
know them, let him give us a list of them, and then we
shall see easily, whether they were at all published or
discovered in our Saviour's time. If there are some of
them that were not at all discovered in our Saviour's
time, let him speak it out, and leave shifting : and if
some of those that were " not necessary for our Sa-
" viour's time, but for the succeeding one only," were
yet discovered in our Saviour's time, why were they not
necessary to be believed in that time ? But the truth is,
he knows not what these doctrines, necessary for suc
ceeding times, are : and therefore can say nothing po
sitively about their discovery. And for those that he has
set down, as soon as he shall name any one of them to
be of the number of those, " not necessary for our Sa-
" viour's time, but necessary for the succeeding one,"
it will presently appear, either that it was discovered in
our Saviour's time ; and then it was as necessary for his
time as the succeeding ; or else, that it was not disco
vered in his time, nor to several converts after his time,
before they were made Christians ; and therefore it was
no more necessary to be believed to make a man a
Christian in the succeeding, than it was in our Saviour's
time. However, general positions and distinctions
without a foundation serve for show, and to beguile un
wary and inattentive readers.

2. Having thus minded him, that the question is
about articles of faith, necessary to be explicitly and
distinctly believed to make a man a Christian ; I then,
in the next place, demand of him to tell me,

XXXIX. Whether or no all the articles, necessary
now to be distinctly and explicitly believed, to
make any man a Christian, were distinctly and ex
plicitly published or discovered in our Saviour's
time ?

Reasonableness of Christianity, $$c. 349
And then I shall desire to know of him,

XL. A reason why they were not.

Those that he instances in, of Christ's death and re
surrection, will not help him one jot ; for they are not
new doctrines revealed, new mysteries discovered ; but
matters of fact, which happen to our Saviour in their
due time, to complete in him the character and predic
tions of the Messiah, and demonstrate him to be the
Deliverer promised. These are recorded of him by the
Spirit of God in holy writ, but are no more necessary
to be believed to make a man a Christian, than any other
part of divine revelation, but as far as they have an im
mediate connexion with his being the Messiah, and
cannot be denied without denying him to be the Mes
siah ; and therefore this article of his resurrection,
(which supposes his death,) and such other propositions
as are convertible with his being the Messiah, are, as
they very well may be, put for his being the Messiah ;
and, as I have showed, proposed to be believed in the
place of it.

All that is revealed in scripture has a consequential
necessity of being believed by all those, to whom it is
proposed ; because it is of divine authority, one part as
much as another. And, in this sense, all the divine
truths in the inspired writings are fundamental, and ne
cessary to be believed. But then this will destroy our
unmasker's select number of fundamental articles; and
" the choicest and sublimest truths of Christianity,"
which, he tells us, " are to be met with in the Epistles,"
will not be more necessary to be believed than any, which
he may think the commonest or meanest truths in any
of the Epistles or the Gospels. Whatsoever part of
divine revelation, whether revealed before, or in, or after
our Saviour's time ; whether it contains (according to
the distinction of our unmasker's nice palate) choice or
common, sublime or not sublime truths, is necessary to
be believed by every one to whom it is proposed, as far
as he understands what is proposed. But God, by Jesus
Christ, has entered into a covenant of grace with man-

350 A Second Vindication of the

kind ; a covenant of faith ; instead of that of works,
wherein some truths are absolutely necessary to be ex
plicitly believed by them to make men Christians ; and
therefore those truths are necessary to be known and
consequently necessary to be proposed to them to make
men Christians. This is peculiar to them to make
men Christians. For all men, as men, are under a ne
cessary obligation to believe what God proposes to them
to be believed ; but there being- certain distinguishing
truths, which belong to the covenant of the gospel,
which if men know not, they cannot be Christians ; and
they being, some of them, such as cannot be known
without being proposed ; those, and those only, are the
necessary doctrines of Christianity I speak of; without
a knowledge of, and assent to which, no man can be a
Christian.

To come therefore to a clear decision of this contro
versy, I desire the un masker to tell me,

XLT. What those doctrines are, which are absolutely
necessary to be proposed to every man to make
him a Christian ?

XLII. 1.- Whether they are all the truths of divine
revelation contained in the Bible ?

For I grant his argument, (which in another place
he uses for some of them, and truly belongs to them all,)
viz. that they were revealed and written there, on pur
pose to be believed, and that it is indispensably neces
sary for Christians to believe them.

XLIII. 2. Or, whether it be only that one article, of
Jesus being the Messiah, which the history of our
Saviour and his apostles preaching has, with such
a peculiar distinction, every- where proposed ?

XLIV. 3. Or, whether the doctrines necessary to be
proposed to every one to make him a Christian, be
any set of truths between the two ?

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 351
And if he says this latter, then I must ask him,

XLV. What they are ? that we may see, why those,
rather than any other, contained in the New Tes
tament, are necessary to be proposed to every man
to make him a Christian ; and, if they are not every
one proposed to him, and assented to by him, he
cannot be a Christian.

The unmasker makes a great noise, and hopes to
give his unwary, though well-meaning readers, odd
thoughts, and strong impressions against my book, by
declaiming against my lank faith, and my narrowing of
Christianity to one article ; which, as he says, is the next
way to reduce it to none. But when it is considered, it
will be found, that it is he that narrows Christianity.
The unmasker, as if he were arbiter and dispenser of the
oracles of God, takes upon him to single out some texts
of scripture; and, where the words of scripture will
not serve his turn, to impose on us his interpretations
and deductions, as necessary articles of faith ; which is,
in effect, to make them of equal authority with the
unquestionable word of God. And thus, partly in the
words of scripture, and partly in words of his own, he
makes a set of fundamentals, with an exclusion of all
the other truths delivered by the Spirit of God, in the
Bible ; though all the rest be of the same divine autho
rity and original, and ought therefore all equally, as far
as they are understood by every Christian, to be be
lieved. I tell him, and I desire him to take notice of
it, God has no-where given him an authority thus to
garble the inspired writings of the holy scriptures.
Every part of it is his word, and ought, every part of it,
to be believed by every Christian man, according as God
shall enable him to understand it. It ought not to be
narrowed to the cut of the un masker's peculiar system ;
it is a presumption of the highest nature, for him thus
to pretend, according to his own fancy, to establish a
set of fundamental articles. This is to diminish the
authority of the word of God, to set up his own ; and
create a reverence to his system, from which the several

352 A Second Vindication of the

parts of divine revelation are to receive their weight,
dignity, and authority. Those passages of holy writ
which suit with that, are fundamental, choice, sublime,
and necessary : the rest of the scripture (as of no great
moment) is not fundamental, is not necessary to be be
lieved, may be neglected, or must be tortured, to comply
with an analogy of faith of his own making. But
though he pretends to a certain set of fundamentals, yet
to show the vanity and impudence of that pretence, he
cannot tell us what they are ; and therefore in vain
contends for a creed he knows not, and is yet no-where.
He neither does, and which is more, I tell him, he never
can, give us a collection of his fundamentals gathered
upon his principles, out of the scripture, with the re
jection of all the rest, as not fundamental. He does
not observe the difference there is between what is ne
cessary to be believed by every man to make him a
Christian, and what is required to be believed by every
Christian. The first of these is what, by the covenant
of the gospel, is necessary to be known, and conse
quently to be proposed to every man, to make him a
Christian : the latter is no less than the whole revelation
of God, all the divine truths contained in holy scrip
ture : which every Christian man is under a necessity to
believe, so far as it shall please God, upon his serious
and constant endeavours, to enlighten his mind to un
derstand them.

The preaching of our Saviour, and his apostles, has
sufficiently taught us what is necessary to be proposed to
every man, to make him a Christian. He that believes
him to be the promised Messiah, takes Jesus for his
King, and repenting of his former sins, sincerely re
solves to live, for the future, in obedience to his laws,
is a subject of his kingdom, is a Christian. If he be not,
I desire the unmasker to tell me, what more is requi
site to make him so. Until he does that, I rest satisfied,
that this is all that was at first, and is still, necessary
to make a man a Christian.

This, though it be contained in a few words, and
those not hard to be understood ; though it be in one
voluntary act of the mind, relinquishing all irregular

Reasonableness of Christianity, &;c. 353

courses, and submitting itself to the rule of him, whom
God hath sent to be our King, and promised to be our
Saviour ; yet it having relation to the race of mankind,
from the first man Adam to the end of the world ; it
being a contrivance, wherein God has displayed so
much of his wisdom and goodness to the corrupt and
lost sons of men ; and it being a design, to which the
Almighty had a peculiar regard in the whole constitu
tion and reconomy of the jews, as well as in the pro
phecies and history of the Old Testament ; this was a
foundation capable of large superstructures : 1. In ex-
plaining the occasion, necessity, use, and end of his
coming. 2. Next in proving him to be the person
promised, by a correspondence of his birth, life, suffer
ings, death, and resurrection, to all those prophecies and
types of him, which had given the expectation of such
a Deliverer ; and to those descriptions of him, whereby
he might be known, when he did come. 3. In the dis
covery of the sort, constitution, extent, and manage
ment of his kingdom. 4. In showing from what we
are delivered by him, and how that deliverance is
wrought out, and what are the consequences of it.

These, and a great many more the like, afford great
numbers of truths delivered both in the historical, epis
tolary, and prophetical writings of the New Testament,
wherein the mysteries of the gospel, hidden from for
mer ages, were discovered ; and that more fully, I grant,
after the pouring out of the Holy Ghost upon the apos
tles. But could nobody take Christ for their promised
King, and resolve to obey him, unless he understood
all the truths that concerned his kingdom, or, as I may
say, mysteries of state of it ? The truth of the contrary
is manifest, out of the plain and uniform preaching of
the apostles, after they had received the Holy Ghost,
that was to guide them into all truth. Nay, after the
writing of those epistles, wherein were contained the
unmasker's sublimest truths; they every-where pro
posed to unbelievers Jesus the Messiah, to be their
King, ordained of God ; and to this joined repentance :
and this alone they preached for the conversion of their
unbelieving hearers. As soon as any one assented to

2 A

354, A Second Vindication of the

this he was pronounced a believer ; and these inspired
rulers of the church, these infallible preachers of the
gospel, admitted into Christ's kingdom by baptism.
And this after, long " after our Saviour's ascension,
" when (as our un masker expresses it) the Holy Ghost
" was to be sent in an especial manner to enlighten
" men's minds, and to discover to them the great mys-
" teries of Christianity," even as long as the apostles
lived : and what others were to do, who afterwards were
to preach the gospel, St. Paul tells us, 1 Cor. iii. 11,
" Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid,
" even Jesus the Messiah." Though upon this founda
tion men might build variously things that would, or
would not hold the touch, yet however as long as they
kept firm to this foundation, they should be saved, as
appears in the following verses.

And indeed, if all the doctrines of the gospel, which
are contained in the writings of the apostles and evan
gelists, were necessary to be understood, and explicitly
believed in the true sense of those that delivered them,
to make a man a Christian ; I doubt, whether ever any
one, even to this day, was a true Christian ; though I
believe the unmasker will not deny, but that, ere this,
Christianity (as he expresses it) " is by certain steps
** climbed to its height."

But for this the unmasker has found a convenient and
wise remedy. It is but for him to have the power to
declare, which of the doctrines delivered in holy writ
are, and which are not necessary to be believed, with an
additional power to add others of his own, that he can
not find there ; and the business is done. For unless
this be allowed him, his system cannot stand ; unless his
interpretations be received for authentic revelation,
we cannot have all the doctrines necessary for our time ;
in truth, we cannot be Christians. For to this only
what he says, concerning the " gradual discovery of the
" doctrines of the gospel," tends. " We are not to think,"
says he, " that all the necessary doctrines of the chris-
*• tian religion were clearly published to the world in
" our Saviour's time : not but that all that were neces-
" sary for that time were published ; but some that

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 355

" were necessary for the succeeding one, were not then
" discovered, or, at least, not fully."

I must ask the unmasker a short question or two ; as,
first,

XLVI. Are not all the doctrines, necessary for our
time, contained in his system ?

Next,

XLVII. Can all the doctrines, necessary for our
time, be proposed in the express words of the
scripture ?

When he has answered these two plain questions, (and
an answer to them I shall expect,) the world will then
see, what he designs by " doctrines necessary for our
" Saviour's time, and doctrines necessary for succeeding
" times ; " whether he means any thing else by it, but
the setting up his system, as the exact standard of the
gospel, and the true and unalterable measure of Chris
tianity, in which " it has climbed to its height."

Let not good and sincere Christians be deceived, nor
perplexed, by this maker of another Christianity, than
what the infallible Spirit of God has left us in the scrip
tures. It is evident from thence, that whoever takes
Jesus the Messiah for his King, with a resolution to live
by his laws, and does sincerely repent, as often as he
transgresses any of them, is his subject ; all such are
Christians. What they are to know, or believe more
concerning him and his kingdom, when they are his
subjects, he has left upon record in the great and sacred
code and constitutions of his kingdom ; I mean in the
holy scriptures. All that is contained therein, as
coming from the God of truth, they are to receive as
truth, and embrace as such. But since it is impossible
explicitly to believe any proposition of the Christian
doctrine, but what we understand, or in any other sense,
than we understand it to have been delivered in ; an
explicit belief is, or can be required in no man, of more
than what he understands of that doctrine. And thus,

2! A 2

356 A Second Vindication of the

whatsoever upon fair endeavours he understands to be
contained in that doctrine, is necessary to him to be
believed : nor can he continue a subject of Christ upon
other terms.

What he is persuaded is the meaning of Christ his
Ring in any expression he finds in the sacred code ;
that, by his allegiance, he is bound to submit his mind
to receive for true, or else he denies the authority of
Christ, and refuses to believe him ; nor can be excused,
by calling any one on earth master. And hence it is
evidently impossible for a Christian to understand any
text, in one sense, and believe it in another, by whom
soever dictated.

All that is contained in the inspired writings, is all of
divine authority, must all be allowed for such, and re
ceived for divine and infallible truth, by every subject
of Christ's kingdom, i. e. every Christian. How comes
then the unmasker to distinguish these dictates of the
Holy Spirit, into necessary and not necessary truths ?
I desire him to produce his commission, whereby he
hath the power given him to tell, which of the divine
truths, contained in the holy scripture, are of necessity
to be believed, and which not. Who made him a judge
or divider between them ? Who gave him this power
over the oracles of God, to set up one and debase an
other, at his pleasure ? Some, as he thinks fit, are the
choicest truths : and what, I beseech him, are the
other ? Who made him a chooser, where nobody can
pick and choose ? Every proposition there, as far as any
Christian can understand it, is indispensably necessary
to be believed : and farther than he does understand it,
it is impossible for him to believe it. The laws of
Christ's kingdom do not require impossibilities ; for
they are all reasonable, and good.

Some of the truths delivered in the holy writ are very
plain : it is impossible, I think, to mistake their mean
ing; and those certainly are all necessary to be expli
citly believed. Others have more difficulty in them,
and are not easy to be understood. Is the unmasker
appointed Christ's vicegerent here, or the Holy Ghost's
interpreter, with authority to pronounce which of these

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 357

are necessary to be believed, and in what sense, and
which not? The obscurity, that is to be found in several
passages of the scripture, the difficulties that cover and
perplex the meaning of several texts, demand of every
Christian study, diligence, and attention, in reading and
hearing the scriptures ; in comparing and examining
them ; and receiving what light he can from all manner
of helps, to understand these books, wherein are con
tained the words of life. This the unmasker, and every
one, is to do for himself; and thereby find out what is
necessary for him to believe. But I do not know that
the mi masker is to understand and interpret for me,
more than I for him. If he has such a power, I desire
him to produce it. Until then, I can acknowledge no
other infallible, but that guide, which he directs me to
himself, here in these words : " according to our Sa-
" viour's promise, the Holy Ghost was to be sent in a
" special manner to enlighten men's minds, and to dis-
" cover to them the great mysteries of Christianity."
For whether by men, he here means those on whom the
Holy Ghost was so eminently poured out, Acts ii. or
whether he means by these words, that special assist
ance of the Holy Ghost, whereby particular men, to the
end of the world, are to be led into the truth, by open
ing their understandings, that they may understand the
scriptures, (for he always loves to speak doubtfully and
indefinitely,) I know no other infallible guide, but the
Spirit of God in the scriptures. Nor has God left it in my
choice to take any man for such. If he had, I should
think the unmasker the unlikeliest to be he, and the last
man in the world to be chosen for that guide : and herein
I appeal to any sober Christian, who hath read what
the unmasker has, with so little truth and decency, (for
it is not always men's fault if they have not sense,) writ
upon this question, whether he would not be of the same
mind ?

But yet, as very an unmasker as he is, he will be ex
tremely apt to call you names, nay, to declare you no
Christian ; and boldly affirm, you have no Christianity,
if you will not swallow it just as it is of his cooking,
You must take it just as he has been pleased to dose it

358 A Second Vindication of the

no more, nor no less, than what is in his system. He
hath put himself into the throne of Christ, and pretends
to tell you which are, and which are not the indis
pensable laws of his kingdom : which parts of his di
vine revelation you must necessarily know, understand,
and believe, and in what sense ; and which you need not
trouble your head about, but may pass by, as not ne
cessary to be believed. He will tell you, that some of
his necessary articles are mysteries, and yet (as he does,
p. 115, of his " Thoughts concerning the causes of
" atheism") that they are easy to be understood by any
man, when explained to him. In answer to that I de
manded of him, " Who was to explain them ? The
" papists, I told him, would explain some of them one
" way, and the reformed another; the remonstrants
" and anti-remonstrants give them different senses;
" and probably the trinitarians and Unitarians will pro-
" fess, that they understand not each other's explica-
" tions." But to this, in his reply, he has not vouch
safed to give me any answer ; which yet I expect, and
I will tell him why ; because, as there are different ex
plainers, there will be different fundamentals. And
therefore unless he can show his authority to be the sole
explainer -of fundamentals, he will in vain make such a
pother about his fundamentals. Another explainer, of
as good authority as he, will set up others against them.
And what then shall we be the better for all this stir and
noise of fundamentals ? All the effect of it will be just
the same it has been these thousand years and upwards ;
schisms, separations, contentions, animosities, quarrels,
blood and butchery, and all that train of mischiefs,
which have so long harassed and defamed Christianity,
and are so contrary to the doctrines, spirit, and end of
the gospel; and which must still continue as long as any
such unmasker shall take upon him to be the dispenser
and dictator to others of fundamentals ; and peremp
torily to define which parts of divine revelation are ne
cessary to be believed, and which Christians may with
safety dispense with, and not believe.

To conclude, what was sufficient to make a man a
Christian in our Saviour's time, is sufficient still, viz. the

Reasonableness of Christianity) §c. 359

taking him for our King and Lord, ordained so by God.
What was necessary to be believed by all Christians in
our Saviour's time, as an indispensable duty, which they
owed to their lord and master, was the believing all di
vine revelation, as far as every one could understand it :
and just so it is still, neither more nor less. This being
so, the un masker may make what use he pleases of his
notion, " that Christianity was erected by degrees," it
will no way (in that sense, in which it is true) turn to
the advantage of his select, fundamental, necessary doc
trines.

The next chapter has nothing in it but his great bug
bear, whereby he hopes to fright people from reading
my book, by crying out Socinianism, Sociriianism !
Whereas I challenge him again, to show one word of
sociniaiiism in it. But, however, it is worth while to
write a book to prove me a socinian. Truly, I did not
think myself so considerable, that the world need be
troubled about me, whether I were a follower of Socinus,
Arminius, Calvin, or any other leader of a sect among
Christians. A Christian I am sure I am, because I be- /
lieve " Jesus to be the Messiah," the King and Saviour
promised and sent by God : and, as a subject of his
kingdom, I take the rule of my faith and life from his
will, declared and left upon record in the inspired
writings of the apostles and evangelists in the New-
Testament ; which I endeavoured to the utmost of my
power, as is my duty, to understand in their true sense
and meaning. To lead me into their true meaning, I
know (as I have above declared) no infallible guide, but
the same Holy Spirit, from whom these writings at
first came. If the un masker knows any other infallible
interpreter of scripture, I desire him to direct me to
him : until then, I shall think it according to my
master's rule, not to b3 called, nor to call any man on
earth, Master. No man, I think, has a right to pre- j
scribe to me my faith, or magisterially to impose his ;
interpretations or opinions on me : nor is it material to
any one what mine are any farther than they carry their
own evidence with them. If this, which I think makes
me of no sect, entitles me to the name of a papist, or a

360 A Second Vindication of the

socinian, because the unmasker thinks these the worst
and most invidious he can give me : and labours to fix
them on me for no other reason, but because I will not
take him for my master on earth, and his system for my
gospel : I shall leave him to recommend himself to the
world by this skill, who, no doubt, will have reason to
thank him for the rareness and subtilty of his discovery.
For I think, I am the first man that ever was found to
be at the same time a socinian, and a factor for Rome.
But what is too hard for such an unmasker ? I must be
what he thinks fit ; when he pleases, a papist ; and when
he pleases, a socinian ; and when he pleases, a ma-
hometan : and probably, when he has considered a little
better, an atheist ; for I hardly escaped it when he writ
last. My book, he says, had a tendency to it ; and if
he can but go on, as he has done hitherto, from sur
mises to certainties, by that time he writes next, his
discovery will be advanced, and he will certainly find
me an atheist. Only one thing I dare assure him of,
that he shall never find, that I treat the things of God
or religion so, as if I made only a trade or a jest of
them. But let us now see, how at present he proves me
a socinian.

His first argument is, my not answering for my leav
ing out Matt, xxviii. 19, and John i. 1, page 82, of his
Socinianism unmasked. This he takes to be a con
fession, that I am a socinian. I hope he means fairly,
and that if it be so on my side, it must be taken for a
standing rule between us, that where any thing is not
answered, it must be taken for granted. And upon that
score I must desire him to remember some passages of
my Vindication, which I have already, and others,
which I shall mind him of hereafter, which he passed
over in silence, and had nothing to say to : which there
fore, by his own rule, I shall desire the reader to ob
serve, that he has granted.

This being premised, I must tell the unmasker, that I
perceive he reads my book with the same understanding
that he writes his own. If he had done otherwise, he
might have seen, that I had given him a reason for my
omission of those two, and other " plain and obvious

Reasonableness of Christianity^ 8$c. 361

" passages, and famous testimonies in the evangelists/'
as he calls them ; where I say, p. 166, " That if I have
" left out none of those passages or testimonies, which
" contain what our Saviour and his apostles preached
" and required assent to, to make men believers, I
" shall think my omissions (let them be what they will)
"no faults in the present case. Whatever doctrines
" Mr. Edwards would have to be believed, to make a
" man a Christian, he will be sure to find them in those
" preachings, and famous testimonies, of our Saviour
" and his apostles, I have quoted. And if they are not
" there, he may rest satisfied, that they were not pro-
" posed, by our Saviour and his apostles, as necessary
" to be believed to make men Christ's disciples." From
which words, any one, but an unmasker, could have
understood my answer to be, that all that was neces
sary to be believed to make men Christians, might be
found in what our Saviour and his apostles proposed
to unbelievers for their conversion : but the two pas
sages above mentioned, as well as a great many others
in the evangelists, being none of those, I had no rea
son to take notice of them. But the unmasker having,
out of his good pleasure, put it once upon me, as he
does in his " Thoughts of the causes of atheism,"
p. 107, that I was an " epitomiser of the evangelical
" writings," though every one may see I make not
that my business ; yet it is no matter for that, I must
be always accountable to that fancy of his. But when
he has proved,

XL VIII. That this is not as just a reasoning for my
omitting them, as several other obvious passages
and famous testimonies in the evangelists, which I
there mention, for whose omission he does not
blame me ;

I will undertake to give him another reason, which I
know not whether he were not better let alone.

The next proof of my being a socinian, is, that I take
the Son of God to be an expression used to signify the
Messiah, Slichtingius and Socinus understood it so ;

A Second Vindication of the

and therefore I am, the unmasker says, a socinian. Just
as good an argument, as that I believe Jesus to be a
prophet, and so do the mahometans ; therefore I am a
mahometan : or thus, the unmasker holds, that the
apostles creed does not contain all things necessary to
salvation ; and so says Knot the Jesuit ; therefore the
unmasker is a papist. Let me turn the tables, and by
the same argument I am orthodox again. For two or
thodox, pious, and very eminent prelates of our church,
whom, when I follow authorities, I shall prefer to Slich-
tingius and Socinus, understand it as I do ; and there
fore I am orthodox. Nay, it so falls out, that if it
were of force either way, the argument would weigh
most on this side ; since I am not wholly a stranger to
the writings of those two orthodox bishops ; but I never
read a page in either of those socinian s. The never
sufficiently admired and valued archbishop Tillotson's
words, which I quoted, the unmasker says, " do not
" necessarily import any such thing." I know no words
that necessarily import any thing to a caviller. But
he was known to have such clear thoughts, and so clear
a style, so far from having any thing doubtful or falla
cious in what he said, that I shall only set down his
words as they are in his sermon of sincerity, p. 2, to
show his meaning : " Nathanael," says he, " being
" satisfied, that he [our Saviour] was the Messiah, he
" presently owned him for such, calling him THE SON
" OF GOD, and the King of Israel."

The words of the other eminent prelate, the bishop of
Ely, whom our church is still happy in, are these : " To
" be the Son of God, and to be Christ, being but
" different expressions of the same thing:" witness
p. 14. And p. 10, " It is the very same thing to believe
" that Jesus is the Christ," and to believe, " that Jesus
" is the Son of God, express it how you please." " This
" alone is the faith which can regenerate a man, and
" put a divine Spirit into him, that it makes him a
" conqueror over the world, as Jesus was." Of this
the unmasker says, that this reverend author, " speaking
" only in a general way, represents these two as the
" same thing," viz. that Jesus is the Christ, and that

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc.

Jesus is the Son of God, because these expressions are
applied to the same person, and because they are both
comprehended in one general name, viz. Jesus. Answ.
The question is, Whether these two expressions, " the
" Son of God," and " the Messiah," in the learned
bishop's opinion, signify the same thing? If his opi
nion had been asked in the point, I know not how he
could have declared it more clearly. For he says, they
are " Expressions of the same thing ;" and that it is the
very same thing to believe., " that Jesus is the Messiah,"
and to believe, " that he is the Son of God ; " which
cannot be so, if Messiah and Son of God have different
significations : for then they will make two distinct pro
positions in different senses, which it can be no more
the same thing to believe, than it is the same thing to
believe that Mr. Edwards is a notable preacher, and a
notable railer ; or than it is to believe one truth, and all
truths. For by the same reason, that it is the same
thing to believe two distinct truths, it will be the same
thing to believe two thousand distinct truths, and con
sequently all truths. The un masker, that he might
seem to say something, says, that " the reverend author
" represents these as the same thing." Answ. The un-
masker never fails, like Midas, to turn every thing he
touches into his own metal. The learned bishop says,
very directly and plainly, that " to be the Son of God,
" and to be the Messiah, are expressions of the same
" thing:" and the unmasker says, he " represents
" these expressions as one thing:" for it is of expres
sions that both the bishop and he speak. Now, expres
sions can be one thing, but one of these two ways :
either in sound, and so these two expressions are not
one ; or in signification, and so they are. And then
the unmasker says, but in other words, what the bishop
had said before, viz. That these two, " to be the Son
" of God, and to be the Messiah, are expressions of the
" same thing." Only the unmasker has put in the
word represents, to amuse his reader, as if he had said
something ; and so indeed he does, after his fashion,
i. e. obscurely and fallaciously ; which, when it comes
to be examined, is but the same thing under show of a

364 A Second Vindication of the

difference *, or else, if it has a different meaning, it is
demonstratively false. But so it be obscure enough to
deceive a willing reader, who will not be at the pains
to examine what he says, it serves his turn.

But yet, as if he had said something of weight, he
gives reasons for putting " represents these two expres-
" sions as one thing," instead of saying " these two
" are but different expressions of the same thing."

The first of his reasons is. Because the reverend au
thor is here " speaking only in a general way." Answ.
What does the unmasker mean by a general way? The
learned bishop speaks of two particular expressions ap
plied to our Saviour. But was his discourse ever so
general how could that alter the plain signification of
his words, viz. that those two are but " different ex-
" pressions of the same thing?"

Secondly, " Because these expressions are applied to
" the same person." Answ. A very demonstrative rea
son, is it not? that therefore they cannot be different
expressions of the same thing.

Thirdly, " And because they are both comprehended
" in one general name, viz. Jesus." Answ. It requires
some skill to put so many falsehoods in so few words ;
for neither both nor either of these expressions are com
prehended in the name Jesus ; and that Jesus, the name
of a particular person, should be a general name, is a
discovery reserved to be found out by this new logician.
However, general, is a learned word, which when a man
of learning has used twice, as a reason of the same thing,
he is covered with generals. He need not trouble him
self any farther about sense ; he may safely talk what
stuff he pleases without the least suspicion of his reader.

Having thus strongly proved just nothing, he pro
ceeds and tells us, p. 91 5 " Yet it does not follow
" thence, but that if we will speak strictly and closely,
" we must be forced to confess, they are of different
" significations." By which words (if his words have
any signification) he plainly allows, that the bishop
meant as he says, that these two are but " different ex-
" pressions of the same thing ; " but withal tells him,
that, if he will " speak closely and strictly," he must

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 365

say, " they are of different significations." My con
cernment in the case being only that in the passage
alleged, the reverend author said, that the Son of God,
and the Messiah, were " different expressions of the
" same thing." I have no more to demand after these
words of the unmasker ; he has in them granted all I
would have : and I shall not meddle with his " speaking
" closely and strictly," but shall leave it to the decisive
authority of this superlative critic to determine whether
this learned bishop, or any one living, besides himself,
can understand the phrases of the New Testament, and
" speak strictly and closely " concerning them. Per
haps, his being yet alive, may preserve this eminent
prelate from the malicious drivelling of this unmasker's
pen, which has bespattered the ashes of two of the same
order, who were no mean ornaments of the English
church ; and if they had been now alive, nobody will
doubt but the unmasker would have treated them after
another fashion.

But let me ask the unmasker, whether if either of
these pious prelates, whose words I have above quoted,
did understand that phrase of the Son of God to stand
for the Messiah, (which they might do without holding
any one socinian tenet ;) he will dare to pronounce him
a socinian ? This is so ridiculous an inference, that I
could not but laugh at it. But withal tell him, Vindic.
p. 172, " That if the sense wherein I understand those
" texts, be a mistake, I shall be beholden to him to set
(( me right : but they are not popular authorities, or
" frightful names, whereby I judge of truth or false-
" hood." To which I subjoin these words: " You
" will now, no doubt, applaud your conjectures; the
" point is gained, and I am openly a socinian ; since
" I will not disown, that I think the Son of God was
" a phrase, that, among the jews, in our Saviour's time,
" was used for the Messiah, though the socinians un-
" derstood it in the same sense. And therefore I must
" certainly be of their persuasion in every thing else.
" I admire the acuteness, force, and fairness of your
" reasoning ; and so I leave you to triumph in your
" conjectures." Nor has he failed my expectation :

366 A Second Vindication of the

" for here, p. 91, of his Socinianism unmasked, he
" upon this erects his comb, and crows most mightily.
" We may," says he, " from hence, as well as other
" reasons, pronounce him the same with those gentle-
" men, (i. e. as he is pleased to call them, my good
" patrons and friends, the racovians ;) which you may
" perceive he is very apprehensive of, and thinks that
" this will be reckoned a good evidence of his being,
" what he denied himself to be before." " The point
" is gained, saith he, and I am openly a socinian."
" He never uttered truer words in his life, and they are
" the confutation of all his pretences to the contrary.
" This truth,, which unwarily dropped from his pen,
" confirms what I have laid to his charge/' Now you
have sung your song of triumph, it is fit you should
gain your victory, by showing,

XLIX. How my understanding the Son of God to
be a phrase used amongst the jews, in our Saviour's
time, to signify the Messiah, proves me to be a
socinian ?

Or, if you think you have proved it already, I desire
you to put your proof into a syllogism : for I confess
myself so dull, as not to see any such conclusion dedu-
cible from my understanding that phrase as I do, even
when you have proved that I am mistaken in it.

The places, which in the New Testament show that
the Son of God stands for the Messiah, are so many and
so clear, that I imagine nobody that ever considered
and compared them together, could doubt of their
meaning, unless he were an unmasker. Several of them
I have collected and set down in my " Reasonableness
" of Christianity," p. 17, 18, 19, 21, 28, 52.

First, John the Baptist, John i. 20, when the jews
sent to know who he was, confessed he himself was not
the Messiah. But of Jesus he says, ver. 34, after having
several ways, in the foregoing verses, declared him to be
the Messiah : " And I saw and bare record, that this
" is the SON OF GOD." And again, chap. iii. 26 —
36, he declaring Jesus to be, and himself not to be the

Reasonableness of Christianity > 8$c. 367

Messiah, he does it in these synonymous terms, of the
Messiah, and the Son of God ; as appears by comparing
ver. 28, 35, 36.

Nathanael owns him to be the Messiah, in these words,
John i. 50, " Thou art the SON OF GOD, thou art the
" King of Israel : " which our Saviour, in the next
verse, calls believing ; a term, all through the history
of our Saviour, used for owning Jesus to be the Messiah.
And for confirming that faith of his, that he was the
Messiah, our Saviour further adds, that he should see
greater things, i. e. should see him do greater miracles,
to evidence that he was the Messiah.

Luke iv. 41, " And devils also came out of many,
" crying, Thou art the Messiah, the Son of God ; and
" he, rebuking them, suffered them not to speak."
And so again, St. Mark tells us, chap. iii. 11, 12,
" That unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down
" before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of
" God. And he strictly charged them, that they should
" not make him known." In both these places, which
relate to different times, and different occasions, the
devils declare Jesus to be the Son of God. It is cer
tain, whatever they meant by it, they used a phrase of
a known signification in that country : and what may
we reasonably thing they designed to make known to
the people by it ? Can we imagine these unclean spirits
were promoters of the gospel, and had a mind to
acknowledge and publish to the people the deity of
our Saviour, which the unmasker would have to be the
signification of the Son of God? Who can entertain such
a thought ? No, they were no friends to our Saviour: and
therefore desired to spread a belief of him, that he was
the Messiah, that so he might, by the envy of the scribes
and pharisees, be disturbed in his ministry, and be cut
off before he had completed it. And therefore we see,
our Saviour in both places forbids them to make him
known ; as he did his disciples themselves, for the same
reason. For when St. Peter, Matt. xvi. ]6, had owned
Jesus to be the Messiah, in these words : " Thou art the
" Messiah, the Son of the living God ; " it follows, ver.
20, " Then charged he his disciples, that they should

368 A Second Vindication of the

" tell no man that he was Jesus the Messiah ; " just as
he had forbid the devils to make him known, i. e. to be
the Messiah. Besides, these words here of St. Peter, can
be taken in no other sense, but barely to signify, that
Jesus was the Messiah, to make them a proper answer
to our Saviour's question. His first question here to his
disciples, ver. 13, is, " Whom do men say, that I, the
" Son of man," am? The question is not. Of what original
do you think the Messiah, when he comes, will be ? For
then this question would have been as it is, Matt. xxii.
42, " What think ye of the Messiah, whose Son is he ?"
if he had inquired about the common opinion, concern
ing the nature and descent of the Messiah. But this
question is concerning himself : Whom, of all the ex
traordinary persons known to the jews, or mentioned in
their sacred writing, the people thought him to be ?
That this was the meaning of his question, is evident
from the answer the apostles gave to it, and his further
demand, ver. 14, 15, " They said, Some say thou art
" John the Baptist, some Elias, and others Jeremias, or
" one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But WHOM
" say ye that I am ? The people take me, some for one of
" the prophets or extraordinary messengers from God,
" and some for another: but which of them do you take
" me to be? Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art
" the Messiah, the Son of the living God." In all which
discourse, it is evident there was not the least inquiry
made by our Saviour concerning the person, nature, or
qualifications of the Messiah ; but whether the people
or his apostles thought him, i. e. Jesus of Nazareth, to
be the Messiah. To which St. Peter gave him a direct
and plain answer in the foregoing words, declaring their
belief of him to be the Messiah : which is all that, with
any manner of congruity, could be made the sense of St.
Peter's answer. This alone of itself were enough to
justify my interpretation of St. Peter's words, without
the authority of St. Mark, and St. Luke, both whose
words confirm it. For St. Mark, chap. viii. 29, renders
it, " Thou art the Messiah ; and St. Luke, chap. ix. 20,
" The Messiah of God." To the like question, " Who
" art thou?" John the Baptist gives a like answer,

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 369

John i. 19, 20, "I am not the Christ." By which
answer, as well as by the foregoing- verses, it is plain,
nothing was understood to be meant by that question,
but, Which of the extraordinary persons, promised to,
or expected by, the jews art thou ?

John xi. 27, the phrase of the Son of God is made
use of by Martha ; and that it was used by her to
signify the Messiah, and nothing else, is evident out of
the context. Martha tells our Saviour, that if he had
been there before her brother died, he, by that divine
power which he had manifested in so many miracles
which he had done, could have saved his life ; and that
now, if our Saviour would ask it of God, he might ob
tain the restoration of his life. Jesus tells her, he shall
rise again : which words, Martha taking to mean, at
the general resurrection, at the last day ; Jesus there
upon takes occasion to intimate to her, that he was the
Messiah, by telling her, that he was " the resurrection
" and the life ;" i. e. that the life, which mankind
should receive at the general resurrection, was by and
through him. This was a description of the Messiah,
it being a received opinion among the jews, that when
the Messiah came, the just should rise, and live with
him for ever. And having made this declaration of
himself to be the Messiah, he asks Martha, " Believest
" thou this?" What? Not whose son the Messiah
should be ; but whether he himself was the Messiah, by
whom believers should have eternal life at the last day.
And to this she gives this direct and apposite answer :
" Yea, Lord, I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son
" of God, which should come into the world." The
question was only, Whether she was persuaded, that
those, who believed in him, should be raised to eternal
life ; that was in effect, " Whether he was the Messiah ?"
And to this she answers, Yea, Lord, I believe this of
thee : and then she explains what was contained in that
faith of hers ; even this, that he was the Messiah, that
was promised to come, by whom alone men were to re
ceive eternal life.

What the jews also understood by the Son of God,
is likewise clear from that passage at the latter end of

2 B

370 .-• A Second Vindication of the

Luke xxii. They having taken our Saviour, and being
very desirous to get a confession from his own mouth,
that he was the Messiah, that they might be from
thence able to raise a formal and prevalent accusation
against him before Pilate ; the only thing the council
asked him, was. Whether he was the Messiah ? v. 67.
To which he answers so, in the following words, that
he lets them see he understood, that the design of their
question was to entrap him, and not to believe in him,
whatever he should declare of himself. But yet he tells
them, " Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right
" hand of the power of God :" Words that to the jews
plainly enough owned him to be the Messiah ; but yet
such as could not have any force against him with Pilate.
He having confessed so much, they hope to draw yet a
clearer confession from him. "Then said they all,
" Art thou then the Son of God ? And he said unto them,
" Ye say that I am. And they said, What need we
" any further witness ? For we ourselves have heard of
" his own mouth." Can any one think, that the doc
trine of his deity (which is that which the unmasker
accuses me for waving) was that which the jews de
signed to accuse our Saviour of, before Pilate ; or that
they needed witnesses for ? Common sense, as well as the
current of the whole history, shows the contrary. No,
it was to accuse him, that he owned himself to be the
Messiah, and thereby claimed a title to be king of the
jews. The Son of God was so known a name amongst the
jews, to stand for the Messiah ; that having got that from
his mouth, they thought they had proof enough for
treason against him. This carries with it a clear and
easy meaning. But if the Son of God be to be taken,
as the unmasker would have it, for a declaration of his
deity, I desire him to make common and coherent
sense of it.

I shall add one consideration more to show that the
Son of God was a form of speech then used among the
jews, to signify the Messiah, from the persons that used
it, viz. John the Baptist, Nathanael, St. Peter, Martha,
the sanhedrim, and the centurion, Matt, xxvii. 54.
Here are jews5 heathens, friends, enemies, men, women,

Reasonableness of Christianity, <fyc. 371

believers and unbelievers, all indifferently use this phrase
of the Son of God, and apply it to Jesus. The question
between the unmasker and me, is, Whether it was used
by these several persons, as an appellation of the Mes
siah, or (as the unmasker would have it) in a quite dif
ferent sense? as such an application of divinity to our
Saviour, that he that shall deny that to be the meaning
of it in the minds of these speakers, denies the divinity
of Jesus Christ. For if they did speak it without that
meaning, it is plain it was a phrase known to have
another meaning ; or else they had talked unintelligible
jargon. Now I will ask the unmasker, " Whether he
" thinks, that the eternal generation, or, as the un-
" masker calls it, filiation of Jesus the Son of God,
" was a doctrine that had entered into the thoughts of
" all the persons above mentioned, even of the Roman
" centurion, and the soldiers that were with him watching
" Jesus ?" If he says he does, I suppose he thinks so
only for this time, and for this occasion : and then it
will lie upon him to give the world convincing reasons
for his opinion, that they may think so too ; or if he
does not think so, he must give up his argument, and
allow that this phrase, in these places, does not neces
sarily import the deity of our Saviour, and the doctrine
of his eternal generation : and so a man may take it to
be an expression standing for the Messiah, without being
a socinian, any more than he himself is one.

" There is one place the unmasker tells us, p. 87,
" that confutes all the surmises about the identity of
" these terms. It is, says he, that famous confession
" of faith which the Ethiopian eunuch made, when
" Philip told him, he might be baptized, if he be-
" lieved. This, without doubt, was said, according to
" that apprehension, which he had of Christ, from
" Philip's instructing him ; for he said he preached
" unto him Jesus, ver. 35. He had acquainted him,
" that Jesus was the Christ, the anointed of God, and
(t also that he was the Son of God; which includes
" in it, that he was God. And accordingly, this noble
" proselyte gives this account of his faith, in order to
" his being baptized, in order to his being admitted a

2 B 2

372 A Second Vindication of the

" member of Christ's church : " I believe that Jesus is
" the Son of God :" or you may read it according to the
Greek, " I believe the Son of God to be Jesus Christ."
Where there are these two distinct propositions :

" 1st, That Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah.

" 2dly, That he is not only the Messiah, but the Son
« of God."

The unmasker is every-where steadily the same
subtle arguer. Whether he has proved that the Son of
God, in this confession of the eunuch, signifies what he
would have, we shall examine by and by. This at least
is demonstration, that this passage of his overturns his
principles ; and reduces his long list of fundamentals to
two propositions, the belief whereof is sufficient to
make a man a Christian. " This noble proselyte, says
" the unmasker, gives this account of his faith, in order
" to his being baptized, in order to his being admitted
" a member of Christ's church/' And what is that
faith, according to the unmasker ? he tells you, " there
" are in it these two distinct propositions, viz. I be-
" lieve, 1st, That Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah ;
" 2dly, That he is not only the Messiah, but the Son of
" God." . If this famous confession, containing but
these two articles, were enough to his being baptized ;
if this faith were sufficient to make this noble proselyte
a Christian ; what is become of all those other articles
of the unmasker's system, without the belief whereof,
he, in other places, tells us, a man cannot be a Christian ?
If he had here told us, that " Philip had not time nor
" opportunity," during his short stay with the eunuch,
to explain to him all the unmasker's system, and make
him understand all his fundamentals ; he had had reason
on his side : and he might have urged it as a reason why
Philip taught him no more. But nevertheless he had,
by allowing the eunuch's confession of faith sufficient
for his admittance as a member of Christ's church,
given up his other fundamentals, as necessary to be be
lieved to make a man a Christian ; even that of the Holy
Trinity ; and he has at last reduced his necessary articles
to these two, viz. " That Jesus is the Messiah ;" and
that " Jesus is the Son of God." So that, after his ridi-

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 373

culous calling mine a lank faith, I desire him to con
sider what he will now call his own. Mine is next to
none, because, as he says, it is but one article. If that
reasoning be good, his is not far from none ; it consists
but in two articles, which is next to one, and very little
more remote from none than one is. If any one had
but as much wit as the unmasker, and could be but as
smart upon the number two, as he has been upon an
unit, here were a brave opportunity for him to lay out
his parts; and he might make vehement complaints
against one, that has thus " cramped our faith, corrupt-
" ed men's minds, depraved the gospel, and abused
" Christianity." But if it should fall out, as I think it
will, that the unmasker's two articles should prove to be
but one; he has saved another that labour, and he
stands painted to himself with his own charcoal.

The unmasker would have the Son of God, in the
confession of the eunuch, to signify something different
from the Messiah : and his reason is, because else it
would be an absurd tautology. Ans. There are many
exegetical expressions put together in scripture, which,
though they signify the same thing, yet are not absurd
tautologies. The unmasker here inverts the proposi
tion, and would have it to signify thus : " The Son of
" God is Jesus the Messiah ;" which is a proposition so
different from what the apostles proposed, every- where
else, that he ought to have given a reason why, when,
every-where else, they made the proposition to be, of
something affirmed of Jesus of Nazareth, the eunuch
should make the affirmation to be of something con
cerning the Son of God : as if the eunuch knew very
well, what the Son of God signified, viz. as the un
masker tells us here, that it included or signified God ;
and that Philip (who, we read, at Samaria preached
TOV Xpij-ov, the Messiah, i. e. instructed them who the
Messiah was) had here taken pains only to instruct him
that this God was Jesus the Messiah, and to bring him
to assent to that proposition. Whether this be natural
to conceive, I leave to the reader.

The tautology, on which the unmasker builds his
whole objection, will be quite removed if we take

37$ A Second Vindication of the

Christ here for a proper name, in which way it is used
by the evangelists and apostles in other places, and par
ticularly by St. Luke, in Acts ii. 38, iii. 6, 20, iv. 10,
xxiv. 24, &c. In two of these places it cannot, with any
good sense, be taken otherwise ; for, if it be not in Acts
iii. 6, and iv. 10, used as a proper name, we must read
those places thus, "Jesus the Messiah of Nazareth.'*
And I think it plain in those others cited, as well as in
several other places of the New Testament, that the word
Christ is used as a proper name. We may easily con
ceive, that long before the Acts were writ, the name
of Christ was grown, by a familiar use, to denote
the person of our Saviour, as much as Jesus. This is so
manifest, that it gave a name to his followers ; who, as
St. Luke tells us, xi. 26, were called Christians ; and that,
if chronologists mistake not, twenty years before St.
Luke writ his history of the apostles : and this so gene
rally, that Agrippa, a jew, uses it, Acts xxvi. 28. Arid
that Christ, as the proper name of our Saviour, was got
as far as Rome, before St. Luke writ the Acts, appears
out of Suetonius, 1. 5 ; and by that name he is called in
Tacitus, Ann. 1. 15. It is no wonder then, that St. Luke,
in writing this history, should sometimes set it down
alone, sometimes joined with that of Jesus, as a proper
name : which is much easier to conceive he did here,
than that Philip proposed more to the eunuch to be be
lieved to make him a Christian, than what, in other
places, was proposed for the conversion of others, or
than what he himself proposed at Samaria.

His 7th chapter is to prove, that I am a socinian,
because I omitted Christ's satisfaction. That matter
having been answered, p. 265, where it came properly
under consideration, I shall only observe here, that the
great stress of his argument lies as it did before, not
upon my total omission of it out of my book, but on
this, that " I have no such thing in the place where the
" advantages of Christ's coming are purposely treated
" of;" from whence he will have this to be an un
avoidable inference, viz. " That I was of opinion, that
" Christ came not to satisfy for us." The reason of
my omission of it in that place, I told him, was because

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 375

my book was chiefly designed for deists : and therefore
I mentioned only those advantages, which all Christians
must agree in ; and, in omitting of that, complied with
the apostle's rule, Rom. xiv. To this he tells me flatly,
that was not the design of my book. Whether the un-
masker knows with what design I published it better
than myself, must be left to the reader to judge : for as
for his veracity in what he knows, or knows not, he has
given so many instances of it, that I may safely refer
that to any body. One instance more of it may be
found in this very chapter, where he says, " I pretend
" indeed, page 163, that in another place of my book,
" I mention Christ's restoring all mankind from the
" state of death, and restoring them to life : and his
" laying down his life for another, as our Saviour pro-
" fesses he did. These few words this vindicator has
" picked up in his book since he wrote it. This is all,
" through his whole treatise, that he hath dropped con-
" cerning that advantage of Christ's incarnation ; i. e.
" Christ's satisfaction." Answ. But that this is not all
that I have dropped through my whole treatise, con
cerning that advantage, may appear by those places
above mentioned, p. 163, where I say, that the design
of Christ's coming was to be offered up, and speak of
the work of redemption ; which are expressions taken
to imply our Saviour's satisfaction. But the unmasker
thinking I should have quoted them, if there had been
any more, besides those mentioned in my vindication,
upon that presumption sticks not boldly to affirm, that
there were no more ; and so goes on with the veracity
of an unmasker. If affirming would do it, nothing-
could be wanting in his cause, that might be for his
purpose. Whether he be as good at proving, this con
sequence (among other propositions, which remain upon
him to be proved) will try, viz.

L. That if the satisfaction of Christ be not mentioned
in the place where the advantages of Christ's
coming are purposely treated of, then I am of opi
nion, that Christ came not to satisfy for us :
Which is all the argument of his 7th chapter.

376 A Second Vindication of the

His last chapter, as his first, begins with a commend
ation of himself; particularly, it boasts his freedom
from bigotism, dogmatizing, censoriousness, and un-
charitableness. I think he hath drawn himself so well
with his own pen, that I shall need refer the reader only
to what he himself has wrote in this controversy, for his
character.

In the next paragraph, p. 104, he tells me, " I laugh
" at orthodoxy/' Answ. There is nothing that I think
deserves a more serious esteem than right opinion, (as
the word signifies,) if taken up with the sense and love of
truth. But this way of becoming orthodox has always
modesty accompanying it, and a fair acknowledgment
of fallibility in ourselves, as well as a supposition of
errour in others. On the other side there is nothing more
ridiculous, than for any man, or company of men, to
assume the title of orthodoxy to their own set of opi
nions, as if infallibility were annexed to their systems,
and those were to be the standing measure of truth to
all the world ; from whence they erect to themselves a
power to censure and condemn others, for differing at
all from the tenets they have pitched upon. The con
sideration of human frailty ought to check this vanity ;
but since it. does not, but that, with a sort of allowance,
it shows itself in almost all religious societies, the play
ing the trick round sufficiently turns it into ridicule.
For each society having an equal right to a good opi
nion of themselves, a man by passing but a river, or a
hill, loses that orthodoxy in one company, which puffed
him up with such assurance and insolence in another ;
and is there, with equal justice, himself exposed to the
like censures of errour and heresy, which he was so for
ward to lay on others at home. When it shall appear,
that infallibility is intailed upon one set of men of
any denomination, or truth confined to any spot of
ground, the name and use of orthodoxy, as now it is in
fashion every- where, will in that one place be reasonable.
Until then, this ridiculous cant will be a foundation too
weak to sustain that usurpation that is raised upon it
It is not that I do not think every one should be per-

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 377

suaded of the truth of those opinions he professes. It is
that I contend for ; and it is that which I fear the great
sticklers for orthodoxy often fail in. For we see gene
rally that numbers of them exactly jump in a whole
large collection of doctrines, consisting of abundance of
particulars; as if their notions were, by one common
stamp, printed on their minds, even to the least linea
ment. This is very hard, if not impossible, to be con
ceived of those who take up their opinions only from
conviction. But, how fully soever I am persuaded of the
truth of what I hold, I am in common justice to allow
the same sincerity to him that differs from me ; and so
we are upon equal terms. This persuasion of truth on
each side, invests neither of us with a right to censure
or condemn the other. I have no more reason to treat
him ill for differing from me, than he has to treat me
ill for the same cause. Pity him, I may ; inform him
fairly, I ought; but contemn, malign, revile, or any
otherwise prejudice him for not thinking just as I do,
that I ought not. My orthodoxy gives me no more au
thority over him, than his (for every one is orthodox to
himself) gives him over me. When the word orthodoxy
(which in effect signifies no more but the opinions of my
party) is made use of as a pretence to domineer (as or
dinarily it is/) it is, and always will be, ridiculous.

He says, " I hate, even with a deadly hatred, all cate-
" chisms and confessions, all systems and models." I
do not remember, that I have once mentioned the word
catechism, either in my Reasonableness of Christianity,
or Vindication ; but he knows " I hate them deadly,"
and I know I do not. And as for systems and models,
all that I say of them, in the pages he quotes to prove
my hatred of them, is only this, viz. in my Vindication,
p. 164, 165, " Some had rather you should write booty,
" and cross your own design of removing men's prejudices
" to Christianity,, than leave out one tittle of what they
" put into their systems. — Some men will not bear it,
" that any one should speak of religion, but according
" to the model that they themselves have made of it."
In neither of which places do I speak against systems or
models, but the ill use that some men make of them.

A Second Vindication of the

He tells me also in the same place, p. 104, that I de
ride mysteries. But for this he hath quoted neither
words nor place : and where he does not do that, I have
reason, from the frequent liberties he takes to impute to
me what no-where appears in my books, to desire the
reader to take what he says not to be true. For did he
mean fairly, he might, by quoting- my words, put all
such matters of fact out of doubt ; and not force me, so
often as he does, to demand where it is : as I do now
here again,

LI. Where it is that I deride mysteries ?

His next words, p. 104, are very remarkable: they
are, " O how he [the vindicator] grins at the spirit of
" creed-making! p. 169, Vindic. The very thoughts of
** which do so haunt him, so plague and torment him,
" that he cannot rest until it be conjured down. And
*'* here, by the way, seeing I have mentioned his ran-
" cour against systematic books and writings, I might
" represent the misery that is coming upon all book-
" sellers, if this gentleman and his correspondence go
" on successfully. Here is an effectual plot to under-
" mine Stationers-hall; for all systems and bodies of
" divinity, philosophy, &c. must be cashiered ; what-
" soever looks like system must not be bought or sold.
" This will fall heavy on the gentlemen of St. Paul's
a church-yard and other places." Here the politic
unmasker seems to threaten me with the posse of Paul's
church-yard, because my book might lessen their gain in
the sale of theological systems. I remember that u De-
" metrius the shrine-maker, which brought no small
'•' gain to the craftsmen, whom he called together, with
" the workmen of like occupation, and said to this
« purpose: Sirs, ye know, that by this craft we have
" our wealth : moreover ye see and hear, that this Paul
" hath persuaded, and turned away much people, saying,
« that they be no gods that are made with hands ; so
" that this our craft is in danger to be set at nought.
" And when they heard these sayings, they were full of
" wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 379

M Ephesians." Have you, sir, who are so good at speech-
making1, as a worthy successor of the silver-smith, re
gulating your zeal for the truth, and your writing di
vinity by the profit it will bring, made a speech to this
purpose to the craftsmen, and told them, that I say,
articles of faith, and creeds, and systems in religion,
cannot be made by men's hands or fancies ; but must
be just such, and no other, than what God hath given
us in the scriptures? And are they ready to cry out to
your content, " Great is Diana of the Ephesians ?" If
you have well warmed them with your oratory, it is to
be hoped they will heartily join with you, and bestir
themselves, and choose you for their champion, to pre
vent the misery, you tell them, is coming upon them, in
the loss of the sale of systems and bodies of divinity :
for, as for philosophy, which you name too, I think you
went a little too far ; nothing of that kind, as I remem
ber, hath been so much as mentioned. But, however,
some sort of orators, when their hands are in, omit no
thing, true or false, that may move those they would
work upon. Is not this a worthy employment, and be
coming a preacher of the gospel, to be a solicitor for
Stationers-hall ? And make the gain of the gentlemen of
Paul's church-yard, a consideration for or against any
book writ concerning religion ? This, if it were ever
thought on before, nobody but an un masker, who lays
all open, was ever so foolish as to publish. But here you
have an account of his zeal : the views of gain are to
measure the truths of divinity. Had his zeal, as he pre
tends in the next paragraph, no other aims, but the
" defence of the gospel ;" it is probable this controversy
would have been managed after another fashion.

Whether what he says in the next, p. 105, to excuse
his so often pretending to "know my heart and thoughts,"
will satisfy the reader, I shall not trouble myself. By
his so often doing it again, in his Socinianism unmasked,
I see he cannot write without it. And so I leave it to
the judgment of the readers, whether he can be allowed
to know other men's thoughts, who, on many occasions,
seems not well to know his own. The railing in the
remainder of this chapter I shall pass by, as I have done

380 A Second Vindication of the

a great deal of the same strain in his book : only to
show how well he understands or represents my sense,
I shall set down my words, as they are in the pages he
quotes, and his inferences from them.

Vindication, p. 171.

I know not tut it may
be true that the anti-trini-
tarians and racovians un
derstand those places as I
do; but it is more than I
know, that they do so. I
took not my sense of those
texts from those writers, but
from the scripture itself,
giving light to its own
meaning, by one place
compared with another.
What, in this way, appears
to me its true meaning, I
shall not decline, because I
am told, that it is so un
derstood by the racovians,
whom I never yet read ;
nor embrace the contrary,

Socinianism Unmasked,

p. 108.

" The professed divines
of England, you must
know, are but a pitiful
sort of folks with this
great racovian rabbi.
He tells us plainly, that
he is not mindful of what
the generality of divines
declare for, p. 171. He
labours so concernedly
to ingratiate himself with
the mob, the multitude
(which he so often talks
of) that he has no regard
to these. The generality of
the rabble are more con-
siderable with him than
the generality of divines."

though the generality of

divines I more converse with, should declare for it. If
the sense wherein I understand those texts be a mistake,
I shall be beholden to you, if you will set me right. But
they are not popular authorities, or frightful names,
whereby I judge of truth or falsehood.

He tells me here of the generality of divines. If he
had aid of the church of England, I could have under
stood him : but he says, " The professed divines of Eng-
" land;" and there being several sorts of divines in
England, who, I think, do not every-where agree in
their interpretations of scripture ; which of them is it I
must have regard to, where they differ? If he cannot
tell me that, he complains here of me for a fault, which
he himself knows not how to mend.

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 381

Vindication, p. 169. Socinianism Unmasked,

The list of materials for
his creed, (for the articles
are not yet formed,) Mr.
Edwards closes, p. 1 1 1 , with
these words : " These are
" the matters of faith con-
" tainedin the epistles; and

p. 109.

" This author, as de
mure and grave as he
would sometimes seem
to be, can scoff at the
matters of faith con

tained in the apostles

" they are essential and in- " epistles, p. 169."
" tegral parts of the gospel

" itself." What ! just these, neither more nor less ? If
you are sure of it, pray let us have them speedily, for
the reconciling of differences in the Christian church,
which has been so cruelly torn about the articles of the
Christian faith, to the great reproach of Christian charity,
and scandal of our true religion.

Does the vindicator here " scoff at the matters of
" faith contained in the epistles ?" or show the vain
pretences of the unmasker : who undertakes to give us,
out of the epistles, a collection of fundamentals, without
being able to say, whether those he sets down be all
or no?

Vindication, p. 176.

I hope you do not think,
how contemptibly soever
you speak of the venerable
mob, as you are pleased to
dignify them, p. 117,that the
bulk of mankind, or, in your

Socinianism Unmasked,

p. 110.

" To coax the mob, he
profanely brings in that
place of scripture; Have
any of the rulers believed
in him ?"

phrase, the rabble, are not

concerned in religion ; or ought not to understand it,
in order to their salvation. I remember the pharisees
treated the common people with contempt ; and said,
" Have any of the rulers, or of the pharisees, believed
" in him ? But this people, who know not the law, are
" cursed." But yet these, who in the censure of the
pharisees, were cursed, were some of the poor, or, if
you please to have it so, the mob, to whom the gospel

382 A Second Vindication of the

was preached by our Saviour, as he tells John's disciples,
Matt. xi. 5.

Where the profaneness of this is, I do not see ; unless
some unknown sacredness of the un masker's person make
it profaneness to show, that he, like the pharisees of old,
has a great contempt for the common people, i. e. the
far greater part of mankind ; as if they and their salva
tion were below the regard of this elevated rabbi. But
this, of profaneness, may be well born from him, since
in the next words my mentioning another part of his
carriage is no less than irreligion.

Vindication, p. 173. Socinianism Unmasked,

He prefers what I say to p. 110.

him my self, to what is offer- " Ridiculously and irre-
ed to him, from the word of " ligiously he pretends,"
God, and makes me this that I prefer what he saith
compliment, that I begin to to me to what is offered to
mend about the close, i. e. me from the word of God,
when I leave off quoting of p. 173.
scripture, and the dull work

was done " of going through the history of the Evan-
" gelists and- the Acts," which he computes, p. 105,
to take up three quarters of my book.

The matter of fact is as I relate it, and so is beyond
pretence ; and for this I refer the reader to the 105th
and 114th pages of his "Thoughts concerning the
" causes of atheism." But had I mistaken, I know not
how he could have called it irreligiously. Make the
worst of it that can be, how comes it to be irreligious ?
What is there divine in an unmasker, that one cannot
pretend (true or false) that he prefers what I say, to
what is offered him from the word of God, without
doing it irreligiously ? Does the very assuming the
power to define articles, and determine who are, and
who are not Christians, by a creed not yet made, erect
an unmasker presently into God's throne, and bestow
on him the title of Dominus Deusque noster, whereby

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 383

offences against him come to be irreligious acts ? I have
misrepresented his meaning ; let it be so : Where is the
irreligion of it? Thus it is : the power of making a reli
gion for others (and those that make creeds do that) be
ing once got into any one's fancy, must at last make alt
oppositions to those creeds and creed-makers irreligion.
Thus we see, in process of time, it did in the church of
Rome : but it was in length of time, and by gentle de
grees. The unmasker, it seems, cannot stay, is in haste,
and at one jump leaps into the chair. He has given us
yet but a piece of his creed, and yet that's enough to
set him above the state of human mistakes or frailties ;
and to mention any such thing in him, is to do irreli
giously.

" We may further see," says the unmasker, p. 110,
" how counterfeit the vindicator's gravity is, whilst he
" condemns frothy and light discourses," p, 173, Vindic.
And " yet, in many pages together, most irreverently
" treats a great part of the apostolical writings, and
" throws aside the main articles of religion as unneces-
" sary." Answ. in my Viridic. p. 170, you may remem
ber these words : " I require you to publish to the world
" those passages, which show my contempt of the epis-
" ties." Why do you not (especially having been so called
upon to do it) set down those words, wherein " I most
" irreverently treat a great part of the apostolical writ-
" ings?0 At least, why do you not quote those many
pages wherein I do it ? This looks a little suspiciously,
that you cannot : and the more because you have, in this
very page, not been sparing to quote places which you
thought to your purpose. I must take leave, therefore,
(if it may be done without irreligion) to assure the reader,
that this is another of your many mistakes in matters
of fact, for which you have not so much as the excuse
of inadvertency : for, as he sees, ^ou have been minded
of it before. But an unmasker, say what you will to
him, will be an unmasker still.

He closes what he has to say to me, in his Socinianism
unmasked, as if he were in the pulpit, with an use of
exhortation. The false insinuations it is filled with
make the conclusion of a piece with the introduction.

384 A Second Vindication of the

As he sets out, so he ends, and therein shows wherein
he places his strength. A custom of making bold with
truth is so seldom curable in a grown man, and the un-
masker shows so little sense of shame, where it is charged
upon him, beyond a possibility of clearing himself, that
nobody is to trouble themselves any farther about that
part of his established character. Letting therefore that
alone to nature and custom, two sure guides, I shall only
intreat him, to prevent his taking railing for argument,
(which I fear he too often does,) that upon his entrance,
every-where, upon any new argument, he would set it
down in syllogism ; and when he has done that (that I
may know what is to be answered) let him then give vent,
as he pleases, to his noble vein of wit and oratory.

The lifting a man's self up in his own opinion, has
had the credit, in former ages, to be thought the lowest
degradation that human nature could well sink itself to.
Hence, says the wise man, Prov. xxvi. 5, " Answer a
" fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own
" conceit :" hereby showing, that self-conceitedness is a
degree beneath ordinary folly. And therefore he there
provides a fence against it, to keep even fools from
sinking yet lower, by falling into it. Whether what
was not so- in Solomon's days be now, by length of
time, in ours, grown into a mark of wisdom and parts,
and an evidence of great performances, I shall not in
quire. Mr. Edwards, who goes beyond all that ever I
yet met with, in the commendation of his own, best
knows why he so extols what he has done in this con
troversy. For fear the praises he has not been sparing
of, in his Socinianism unmasked, should not sufficiently
trumpet out his worth, or might be forgotten ; he, in a
new piece, intitled, " the Socinian creed," proclaims
again his mighty deeds, and the victory he has establish
ed to himself by them, in these words : " But he and
" his friends (the one-article men) seem to have made
" satisfaction, by their profound silence lately, whereby
" they acknowledge to the world, that they have nothing
" to say in reply to what I laid to their charge, and fully
" proved against them, &c." Socinian creed, p. 128.
This fresh testimony of no ordinary conceit, which Mr.

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 385

Edwards hath, of the excellency and strength of his rea
soning, in his Socinianism unmasked, I leave with him
and his friends, to be considered of at their leisure : and,
if they think I have misapplied the term of conceited-
ness, to so wise, understanding, and every way accom
plished a disputant, (if we may believe himself), I will
teach them a way how he, or any body else, may fully
convince me of it. There remains on his score, marked
in this reply of mine, several propositions to be proved
by him. If he can find but arguments to prove them,
that will bear the setting down in form, and will so
publish them, I will allow myself to be mistaken. Nay,
which is more, if he, or any body, in the 112 pages of
his Socinianism unmasked, can find but ten arguments
that will bear the test of syllogism, the true touchstone
of right arguing ; { will grant, that that treatise deserves
all those commendations he has bestowed upon it, though
it be made up more of his own panegyric, than a con
futation of me.

In his socinian creed, (for a creed-maker he will be;
and whether he has been as lucky for the socinians as
for the orthodox, I know not,) p. 120, he begins with
me, and that with the same conquering hand and skill,
which can never fail of victory ; if a man has but wit
enough to know what proposition he is able to confute,
and then make that his adversary's tenet. But the re
petitions of his old song concerning one article, the
epistles, &c. which occur here again, I shall only set
down, that none of these excellent things may be lost,
whereby this acute and unanswerable writer has so well
deserved his own commendations : viz. " That I say,
" there is but one single article of the Christian truth
" necessary to be believed and assented to by us, p. 121.
" That I slight the Christian principles, curtail the ar-
" tides of our faith, and ravish Christianity itself from
" him, p. 123. And that I turn the epistles of the
" apostles into waste paper," p. 127.

These and the like slanders 1 have already given an
answer to, in my reply to his former book. Only one
new one here I cannot pass over in silence, because of the
remarkable profaneness which seems to me to be in it ;

2 c

386 A Second Vindication of the

which, I think, deserves public notice. In my " Rea-
" sonableness of Christianity," I have laid together
those passages of our Saviour's life, which seemed to
me most eminently to show his wisdom, in that conduct
of himself, with that reserve and caution which was
necessary to preserve him, and carry him through the
appointed time of his ministry. Some have thought I
had herein done considerable service to the Christian re
ligion, by removing those objections which some were
apt to make from our Saviour's carriage, not rightly
understood. This creed-maker tells me, p. 1ST, " That
" I make our Saviour a coward :" a word not to be ap
plied to the Saviour of the world by a pious or discrete
Christian, upon any pretence, without great necessity,
and sure grounds ! If he had set down my words, and
quoted the page, (which was the least could have been
done to excuse such a phrase,) we should then have seen
which of us two this impious and irreligious epithet,
given to the holy Jesus, has for its author. In the
mean time, I leave it with him, to be accounted for,
by his piety, to those, 'who b}^ his example shall be en
couraged to entertain so vile a thought, or use so pro
fane an expression of the Captain of our salvation, who
freely gave himself up to death for us.

He also says in the same page, 127, " That I every-
" where strike at systems, the design of which is to
" establish one of my own, or to foster scepticism, by
" beating down all others."

For clear reason, or good sense, I do not think our
creed-maker ever had his fellow. In the immediately
preceding words of the same sentence he charges me
with " a great antipathy against systems ;" and, be
fore he comes to the end of it, finds out my design to
be the " establishing one of my own." So that this,
" my antipathy against systems" makes me in love with
one. " My design/' he says, is to establish a system of
"•' my own, or to foster scepticism, in beating down all
" others." Let my book, if he pleases, be my system
of Christianity. Now is it in me any more fostering
scepticism to say my system is true, and others not, than
it is in the creed-maker to say so of all other systems

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 387

but his own ? For I hope he does not allow any system
of Christianity to be true, that differs from his, any more
than I do.

But I have spoken against all systems. Answ. And
always shall, so far as they are set up by particular men,
or parties, as the just measure of every man's faith;
wherein every thing that is contained, is required and
imposed to be believed to make a man a Christian : such
an opinion and use of systems I shall always be against,
until the creed-maker shall tell me, amongst the variety
of them, which alone is to be received and rested in, in
the absence of his creed ; which is not yet finished, and,
I fear, will not, as long as I live. That every man
should receive from others, or make to himself such a
system of Christianity, as he found most comformable to
the word of God, according to the best of his under
standing, is what I never spoke against : but think it
every one's duty to labour for, and to take all oppor
tunities, as long as he lives, by studying the scriptures
every day, to perfect.

But this, I fear, will not go easily down with our
author ; for then he cannot be a creed-maker for others :
a thing he shows himself very forward to be ; how able
to perform it, we shall see when his creed is made. In
the mean time, talking loudly and at random, about
fundamentals, without knowing what is so, may stand
him in some stead.

This being all that is new, which I think myself con
cerned in, in this socinian creed, I pass on to his Post
script. In the first page whereof, I find these words :
" I found that the manager of the Reasonableness of
" Christianity had prevailed with a gentleman to make
" a sermon upon my refutation of that treatise, and the
" vindication of it." Such a piece of impertinency,
as this, might have been born from a fair adversary :
but the sample Mr. Edwards has given of himself, in
his Socinianism unmasked, persuades me this ought to
be bound up with what he says of me in his introduction
to that book, in these words : " Among others, they
" thought and made choice of a gentleman, who, they
" knew, would be extraordinary useful to them. And

2 c 2

388 A Second Vindication of the

" he, it is probable, was as forward to be made use of
" by them, and presently accepted of the office that was
" assigned him : " and more there to the same purpose.
All which I know to be utterly false.

It is a pity that one who relies so intirely upon it,
should have no better an invention. The socinians set
the author of the " Reasonableness of Christianity,"
&c. on work to write that book ; by which discovery
the world being (as Mr. Edwards says) let into the pro
ject, that book is confounded, baffled, blown off, and
by this skilful artifice there is an end of it. Mr. Bold
preaches and publishes a sermon without this irrefraga
ble gentleman's good leave and liking. What now
must be done to discredit it, and keep it from being
read ? Why Mr. Bold too was set on work, by " the
•• manager of the Reasonableness of Christianity," &c.
In your whole storehouse of stratagems5 you that are so
great a conqueror, have you but this one way to destroy
a book, which you set your mightiness against, but to
tell the world it was a job of journey-work for some
body you do not like ? Some other would have done
better in this new case,, had your happy invention been
ready with it : for you are not so bashful or reserved,
but that yoii may be allowed to be as great a wit as he
who professed himself " ready at any time to say a good
" or a new thing, if he could but think of it." But in
good earnest, sir, if one should ask you, Do you think
no books contain truth in them, which were undertaken
by the procuration of a bookseller ? I desire you to be a
little tender in the point, not knowing how far it may
reach. Aye, but such booksellers live not at the lower
end of Pater-noster-row, but in Paul's church-yard,
and are the managers of other guise-books, than the
66 Reasonableness of Christianity." And therefore you
very rightly subjoin, " Indeed it was a great master-
" piece of procuration, and we can't but think that
*' man must speak truth, and defend it very impartially
" and substantially, who is thus brought on to under-
" take the cause." And so Mr. Bold's sermon is found
to have neither truth nor sense in it, because it was
printed by a bookseller at the lower end of Pater-noster-

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 389

row : for that, I dare say, is all you know of the matter.
But that is hint enough for a happy diviner, to he sure
of the rest, and with confidence to report that for cer
tain matter of fact, which had never any being but in
the fore-casting side of his politic brain.

But whatever were the reasons that moved Mr. B

to preach that sermon, of which I know nothing ; this
I am sure, it shows only the weakness and malice (I will
not say, and ill breeding, for that concerns not one of
Mr. Edwards's pitch) of any one who excepts against it,
to take notice of any thing more than what the author
has published. Therein alone consists the errour, if
there be any ; and that alone those meddle with, who
write for the sake of truth. But poor cavillers have other
purposes, and therefore must use other shifts, and make
a bustle about something besides the argument, to pre
judice and beguile unwary readers.

The only exception the creed-maker makes to Mr.
BokTs sermon, is the contradiction he imputes to him,
in saying : " That there is but one point or article
" necessary to be believed for the making a man a chris-
" tian : and that there are many points besides this,
" which Jesus Christ hath taught and revealed, which
" every sincere Christian is indispensably obliged to en-
" deavour to understand : " and " that there are parti-
" cular points and articles, which being known to be
" revealed by Christ, Christians must indispensably as-
*l sent to." And where, now, is there any thing like
a contradiction in this ? Let it be granted, for exam
ple, that the creed-maker's set of articles (let their
number be what they will, when lie has found them all
out) are necessary to be believed, for the making a man
a Christian. Is there any contradiction in it to say, there
are many points besides these, which Jesus Christ hath
taught and revealed, which every sincere Christian is in
dispensably obliged to endeavour to understand ? If this
be not so, it is but for any one to be perfect in Mr,
Edwards's creed, and then he may lay by the bible, and
from thenceforth he is absolutely dispensed with from
studying or understanding any thing more of the scrip
ture.

390 A Second Vindication of the

But Mr. Edwards's supremacy is not yet so far esta
blished,, that he will dare to say, that Christians are
not obliged to endeavour to understand any other
points revealed in the scripture, but what are contained
in his creed. He cannot yet well discard all the rest of
the scripture, because he has yet need of it for the com
pleting of his creed, which is like to secure the bible to
us for some time yet. For I will be answerable for it,
he will not quickly be able to resolve what texts of the
scripture do, and what do not, contain points necessary
to be believed. So that I am apt to imagine, that the
creed-maker, upon second thoughts, will allow that
saying, that there is but one, or there are but twelve,
or there are but as many as shall be set down, (when
he has resolved which they shall be,) necessary to the
making a man a Christian ; and the saying, there are
other points besides, contained in the scripture, which
every sincere Christian is indispensably obliged to en
deavour to understand, and must believe, when he
knows them to be revealed by Jesus Christ, are two
propositions that may consist together without a contra
diction.

Every Christian is to partake of that bread, and that
cup, which is the communion of the body and blood
of Christ. And is not every sincere Christian indis
pensably obliged to endeavour to understand these
words of our Saviour's institution, " This is my body,
" and this is my blood ? " And if, upon his serious en
deavour to do it, he understands them in a literal sense,
that Christ meant, that that was really his body and
blood, and nothing else ; must he not necessarily be
lieve that the bread and wine, in the Lord's supper, is
changed really into his body and blood, though he
doth not know how ? Or, if having his mind set
otherwise, he understands the bread and wine to be
really the body and blood of Christ, without ceasing to
be the true bread and wine : or else, if he understands
them, that the body and blood of Christ are verily and
indeed given and received, in the sacrament, in a spiri
tual manner : or, lastly, if he understands our Saviour to
mean, by those words, the bread and wine to be only a

Reasonableness of Christianity ^ <S$c. 391

representation of his body and blood; in which way
soever of these four, a Christian understands these words
of our Saviour to be meant by him, is he not obliged in
that sense to believe them to be true, and assent to them ?
Or can he be a Christian, and understand these words to
be meant by our Saviour, in one sense, and deny his
assent to them as true, in that sense ? Would not this be
to deny our Saviour's veracity, and consequently his
being the Messiah, sent from God ? And yet this is put
upon a Christian, where he understands the scripture in
one sense, and is required to believe it in another. From
all which it is evident, that to say there is one, or any
number of articles necessary to be known and believed
to make a man a Christian, and that there are others con
tained in the scripture, which a man is obliged to en
deavour to understand, and obliged also to assent to, as
he does understand them, is no contradiction.

To believe Jesus to be the Messiah, and to take him
to be his Lord and King, let us suppose to be that only
which is necessary to make a man a Christian : may it
not yet be necessary for him, being a Christian, to study
the doctrine and law of this his Lord and King, and
believe that all that he delivered is true ? Is there any
contradiction in holding of this ? But this creed-maker,
to make sure work, and not to fail of a contradiction in
Mr. Bold's words, mis-repeats them, p. 241, and quite
contrary, both to what they are in the sermon, and what
they are, as set down by the creed-maker himself, in the
immediately preceding page. Mr. Bold says, " There
" are other points that Jesus Christ hath taught and
" revealed, which every sincere Christian is indispensa-
" bly obliged to understand ; and which being known
" to be revealed by Christ, he must indispensably assent
" to. From which the creed-maker argues thus, p.
" 240, Now, if there be other points, and particular
" articles, and those many, which a sincere Christian is
" obliged, and that necessarily and indispensably, to un-
" derstand, believe, and assent to : then this writer hath,
" in effect, yielded to that proposition I maintained,
" viz. that the belief of one article is not sufficient to

392 A Second Vindication of the

" make a man a Christian ; and consequently he runs
" counter to the proposition he had laid down."

Is there no difference, I beseech you, between being
" indispensably obliged to endeavour to understand, and
" being indispensably obliged to understand any point ?"
It is the first of these Mr. Bold says, and it is the latter
of these you argue from, and so conclude nothing against
him : nor can you to your purpose. For until Mr. Bold
says (which he is far from saying,) that every sincere
Christian is necessarily and indispensably obliged to un
derstand all those texts of scripture, from whence you
should have drawn your necessary articles, (when you
have perfected your creed.) in the same sense that you
do ; you can conclude nothing against what he had said,
concerning that one article, or any thing that looks like
running counter to it. For it may be enough to con
stitute a man a Christian, and one of Christ's subjects, to
take Jesus to be the Messiah, his appointed King, and
yet, without a contradiction, so that it may be his indis
pensable duty, as a subject of that kingdom, to endeavour
to understand all the dictates of his sovereign, and to as
sent to the truth of them, as far as he understands them.

But that which the good creed-maker aims at, with
out which all his necessary articles fall, is, that it should
be granted him, that every sincere Christian was neces
sarily and indispensably obliged to understand all those
parts of divine revelation, from whence he pretends to
draw his articles, in their true meaning, i. e. just as
he does. But his infallibility is not yet so established,
but that there will need some proof of that proposition.
And when he has proved, that every sincere Christian
is necessarily and indispensably obliged to understand
those texts in their true meaning ; and that his inter
pretation of them is that true meaning ; I shall then ask
him, Whether " every sincere Christian is not as neces-
" sarily and indispensably obliged " to understand other
texts of scripture in their true meaning, though they
have no place in his system ?

For example, To make use of the instance above-
mentioned, is not every sincere Christian necessarily

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 393

and indispensably obliged to endeavour to understand
these words of our Saviour, " This is my body, and
" this is my blood," that he may know what he receives
in the sacrament ? Does he cease to be a Christian, who
happens not to understand them just as the creed-maker
does? Or may not the old gentleman at Rome (who
has somewhat the ancienter title to infallibility) make
transubstantiation a fundamental article necessary to be
believed there, as well as the creed-maker here make his
sense of any disputed text of scripture a fundamental
article necessarv to be believed ?

•/

Let us suppose Mr. Bold had said, that instead of one
point, the right knowledge of the creed-maker's one
hundred points (when he has resolved on them) doth
constitute and make a person a Christian ; yet there are
many other points Jesus Christ hath taught and revealed,
which every sincere Christian is indispensably obliged
to endeavour to understand, and to make a due use of;
for this, I think, the creed-maker will not deny. From
whence, in the creed-maker's words, I will thus argue :
" Now if there be other points, and particular articles,
" and those many, which a sincere Christian is obliged,
" and that necessarily and indispensably, to understand,
" and believe, and assent to ; then this writer doth, in
" effect, yield to that proposition which I maintained,
" viz. That the belief of those one hundred articles
" is not sufficient to make a man a Christian :" for this
is that which I maintain, that upon this ground the
belief of the articles, which he has set down in his list,
are not sufficient to make a man a Christian ; and that
upon Mr. Bold's reason, which the creed-maker insists
on against one article, viz. because there are many other
points Jesus Christ hath taught and revealed, which
every sincere Christian is as necessarily and indispensa
bly obliged to endeavour to understand, and make a due
use of.

But this creed-maker is cautious, beyond any of his
predecessors : He will not be so caught by his own ar
gument ; and therefore is very shy to give you the pre
cise articles that every sincere Christian is necessarily and
indispensably obliged to understand and give his assent

394 A Second Vindication of the

to. Something he is sure there is, that he is indispensa
bly obliged to understand and assent to, to make him a
Christian ; but what that is he cannot yet tell. So that
whether he be a Christian or no, he does not know ; and
what other people will think of him, from his treating
of the serious things of Christianity, in so trifling and
scandalous a way, must be left to them.

In the next paragraph, p. 242, the creed-maker tells
US; Mr. Bold goes on to confute himself, in saying, " A
" true Christian must assent unto this, that Christ Jesus
" is God." But this is just such another confutation of
himself as the before-mentioned, i. e. as much as a
falsehood, substituted by another man, can be a con
futation of a man's self, who has spoken truth all of
a-piece. For the creed-maker, according to his sure way
of baffling his opponents, so as to leave them nothing to
answer, hath here, as he did before, changed Mr. Bold's
words, which in the 35th page, quoted by the creed-
maker, stand thus : " When a true Christian under-
" stands, that Christ Jesus hath taught, that he is God,
" he must assent unto it :" which is true, and con
formable to what he had said before, that every sincere
Christian must endeavour to understand the points taught
and revealed' by Jesus Christ ; which being known to be
revealed by him, he must assent unto.

The like piece of honesty the creed-maker shows in
the next paragraph, p. 243., where he charges Mr.
Bold with saying, (C That a true Christian is as much
" obliged to believe, that the Holy Spirit is God, as
" to believe that Jesus is the Christ/' p. 40. In which
place, Mr. Bold's words are : " When a true Christian
" understands, that Christ Jesus hath given this ac-
" count of the Holy Spirit, viz. that he is God; he
" is as much obliged to believe it, as he is to believe,
" that Jesus is the Christ : " which is an incontesta
ble truth, but such an one as the creed-maker himself
saw would do him no service ; and therefore he mangles
it, and leaves out half to serve his turn. But he that
should give a testimony in the slight affairs of men, and
their temporal concerns, before a court of judicature, as
the creed-maker does here, and almost every- where, in

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 395

the great affairs of religion, and the everlasting concern
of souls, before all mankind, would lose his ears for it.
What, therefore, this worthy gentleman alleges out of
Mr. Bold, as a contradiction to himself, being only the
creed-maker's contradiction to truth, and clear matter
of fact, needs no other answer.

The rest of what he calls " Reflections on Mr. Bold's
" sermon " being nothing but either rude and misbe
coming language of him ; or pitiful childish application
to him, to change his persuasion at the creed-maker's
entreaty, and give up the truth he hath owned, in
courtesy to this doughty combatant ; shows the ability
of the man. Leave off begging the question, and su
perciliously presuming, that you are in the right ; and,
instead of that, show by argument : and I dare answer
for Mr. Bold you will have him, and I promise you,
with him, one convert more. But arguing is not, it
seems, this notable disputant's way. If boasting of
himself, and contemning of others, false quotations, and
feigned matters of fact, which the reader neither can
know, nor is the question concerned in, if he did know,
will not do ; there is an end of him : he has shown his
excellency in scurrilous declamation ; and there you
have the whole of this unanswerable writer. And for
this, I appeal to his own writings in this controversy,
if any judicious reader can have the patience to look
them over.

In the beginning of his " Reflections on Mr. Bold's
" sermon," he confidently tells the world, " that he
" had found that the manager of the Reasonableness of
" Christianity had prevailed on Mr. Bold to preach a
" sermon upon his Reflections," &c. And adds, " And
" we cannot but think, that that man must speak the
" truth, and defend it very impartially and substan-
" tially, who is thus brought on to undertake the
" cause." And at the latter end he addresses himself
to Mr. Bold, as one that is drawn off, to be an under
journey man- worker in socinianism. In his gracious
allowance, " Mr. Bold is, seemingly, a man of some
" relish of religion and piety," p. 244. He is forced
also to own him to be a man of sobriety and temper,

396 A Second Vindication of the

p. 245. A very good rise, to give him out to the world,
in the very next words, as a man of a profligate con
science : for so he must be, who can be drawn off to
preach, or write for socinianism, when he thinks it a most
dangerous crrour; who can " dissemble with himself,
" and choke his inward persuasions," (as the creed-
maker insinuates that Mr. Bold does, in the same ad
dress to him, p. 248,) and write contrary to his light.
Had the creed-maker had reason to think in earnest,
that Mr. Bold was going off to socinianism, he might
have reasoned with him fairly, as with a man running
into a dangerous errour ; or if he had certainly known,
that he was by any by-ends prevailed on to undertake
a cause contrary to his conscience, he might have some
reason to tell the world, as he does, p. 239, " That we
" cannot think he should speak truth, who is thus
" brought to undertake the cause." If he does not
certainly know, that " Mr. Bold was THUS brought to
" undertake the cause," he could not have shown a more
villanous and unchristian mind, than in publishing such
a character of a minister of the gospel, and a worthy
man, upon no other grounds, but because it might be
subservient to his ends. He is engaged in a contro
versy, that -by argument he cannot maintain ; nor knew
any other way, from the beginning, to attack the book
he pretends to write against, but by crying out socinian
ism ; a name he knows in great disgrace with all other
sects of Christians, and therefore sufficient to deter all
those who approve and condemn books by hearsay,
without examining their truth themselves, from pe
rusing a treatise, to which he could affix that imputation.
Mr. Bold's name, (who is publicly known to be no
socinian) he foresees, will wipe off that false imputation.,
with a great many of those who are led by names more
than things. This seems exceedingly to trouble him,
and he labours might and main, to get Mr. Bold to
quit a book as socinian, which Mr. Bold knows is not
socinian, because he has read and considered it.

But though our creed-maker be mightily concerned,
that Mr. B — d should not appear in the defence of it ;
yet this concern cannot raise him one jot above that

Reasonableness of Christianity, $c. 397

honesty, skill, and good breeding-, which appears to
wards others. He manages this matter with Mr. B — d,
as he has done the rest of the controversy ; just in the
same strain of invention, civility, wit, and good sense.
He tells him, besides what I have above set down,
" That he is drawn off to debase himself, and the post,
" i. e. the ministry he is in, p. 245. That he hath said
" veiy ill things, to the lessening and impairing, yea,
" to the defaming of that knowledge and belief of our
" Saviour, and of the articles of Christianity, which are
" necessarily required of us, p. £45. That the devout
" and pious," (whereby he means himself: for one, and
none, is his own beloved wit and argument,) " observ-
" ing that Mr. Bold is come to the necessity of but ONE
" article of faith, they expect that he may in time hold
" that NONE is necessary, p. 248. That if he writes
" again in the same strain, he will write rather like a
" Turkish spy, than a Christian preacher ; and that he
" is a backslider, and sailing to Racovia with a side
" wind : " than which, what can there be more scur
rilous, or more malicious ? And yet at the same time
that he outrages him thus, beyond not only what Chris
tian charity, but common civility, would allow in an
ingenuous adversary, he makes some awkward attempts
to sooth him with some ill-timed commendations ;
and would have his undervaluing Mr. Bold's animad
versions pass for a compliment to him ; because he, for
that reason, pretends not to believe so crude and shal
low a thing (as he is pleased to call it) to be his. A
notable contrivance to gain the greater liberty of rail
ing at him under another name, when Mr. B — d's, it
seems, is too well known to serve him so well to that
purpose. Besides, it is of good use to fill up three or
four pages of his Reflections ; a great convenience to a
writer, wlio knows all the ways of baffling his oppo
nents, but argument; and who always makes a great
deal of stir about matters foreign to his subject; which,
whether they are granted or denied, make nothing at all
to the truth of the question on either side. For what is
it to the shallowness or depth of the animadversions,
who writ them ? Or to the truth or falsehood of Mr.

398 A Second Vindication of the

B — d's defence of the " Reasonableness of Christianity,"
whether a layman, or a churchman, a socinian, or
one of the church of England, answered the creed-
maker as well as he ? Yet this is urged as a matter of
great weight ; but yet, in reality, it amounts to no more
but this, that a man of any denomination, who wishes
well to the peace of Christianity, and has observed the
horrible effects the Christian religion has felt from the
impositions of men, in matters of faith, may have reason
to defend a book, wherein the simplicity of the gospel,
and the doctrine proposed by our Saviour and his
apostles, for the conversion of unbelievers, is made out,
though there be not one word of the distinguishing
tenets of his sect in it. But that all those, who, under
any name, are for imposing their own orthodoxy, as
necessary to be believed, and persecuting those who
dissent from them, should be all against it, is not per
haps very strange.

One thing more I must observe of the creed-maker
on this occasion : in his socinian creed, chap. vi. the
author of the " Reasonableness of Christianity," &c.
and his book, must be judged of, by the characters and
writings of those who entertain or commend his no
tions. " A professed Unitarian has defended it ; " there
fore he is a socinian. The author of A letter to the
deists speaks well of it ; therefore he is a deist. An
other, as an abetter of the Reasonableness of Christian
ity, he mentions, p. 125, whose letters I have never
seen : and his opinions too are, I suppose, set down
there as belonging to me. Whatever is bad in the
tenets or writings of these men, infects me. But the
mischief is, Mr. Bold's orthodoxy will do me no good :
but because he has defended my book against Mr.
Edwards, all my faults are become his, and he has a
mighty load of accusations laid upon him. Thus con
trary causes serve so good a natured, so charitable, and
candid a writer as the creed- maker, to the same purpose
of censure and railing. But I shall desire him to
figure to himself the loveliness of that creature, which
turns every thing into venom. What others are, or
hold, who have expressed favourable thoughts of my

Reasonableness of Christianity ^ <fyc. 399

book, I think myself not concerned in. What opi
nions others have published, make those in my book
neither true nor false ; and he that, for the sake of
truth, would confute the errours in it, should show then-
falsehood and weakness, as they are : but they who write
for other ends than truth, are always busy with other
matters ; and where they can do nothing by reason and
argument, hope to prevail with some by borrowed pre
judices and party.

Taking therefore the Animadversions, as well as the
sermon, to be his, whose name they bear, I shall leave to
Mr. B — d himself to take what notice he thinks fit of
the little sense, as well as great impudence, of putting
his name in print to what is not his, or taking it away
from what he hath set it to, whether it belongs to his
bookseller or answerer. Only I cannot pass by the
palpable falsifying of Mr. B — d's words, in the begin
ning of his epistle to the reader, without mention. Mr.
B — d's words are : " whereby I came to be furnished
" with a truer and more just notion of the main design
" of that TREATISE." And the good creed-maker sets
them down thus : " The main design of MY OWN
" TREATISE OR SERMON : " a sure way for such a cham
pion for truth to secure to himself the laurel or the
whetstone !

This irresistible disputant, (who silences all that come
in his way, so that those that would cannot answer him)
to make good the mighty encomiums he has given him-
self, ought (one would think) to clear all as he goes,
and leave nothing by the way unanswered, for fear he
should fall into the number of those poor baffled
wretches, whom he with so much scorn reproaches, that
they would answer, if they could.

Mr. B — d begins his Animadversions with this re
mark, that our creed-maker had said, That " I give it
" over and over again in these formal words, viz. That
" nothing is required to be believed by any Christian
" man but this, That Jesus is the Messiah.5' To which
Mr. B — d replies, p. 4, in these words : " Though I
" have read over the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c.
" with some attention, I have not observed those

400 A Second Vindication of the

" formal words in any part of that book, nor any
" words that are capable of that construction ; provided
" they be considered with the relation they have to, and
" the manifest dependence they have on, what goes be-
" fore, or what follows after them/'

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

Whether it was because he would not, or because he
could not, let the reader judge. But this is down upon
his score already, and it is expected he should answer to
it, or else confess that he cannot. And that there may
be a fair decision of this dispute, I expect the same
usage from him, that he should set down any proposition
of his I have not answered to, and call on me for an an
swer, if I can ; and if I cannot, I promise him to own it
in print.

The creed-maker had said, " That it is most evident to
" any thinking and considerate person, that I purposely
" omit the epistolary writings of the apostles because
" they are fraught with other fundamental doctrines,
" besides that which I mention."

To this Mr. B— d answers, p. 5, That if by " funda-
" mental articles, Mr. Edwards means here, all the
" propositions delivered in the epistles, concerning just
" those particular heads, he [Mr. Edwards] had here
" mentioned ; it lies upon him to prove, that Jesus
" Christ hath made it necessary, that every person must
" have an explicit knowledge and belief of all those
" before he can be a Christian."

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

And yet, without an answer to it, all his talk about
fundamentals, and those which he pretended to set
down in that place, under the name of fundamentals,
will signify nothing in the present case ; wherein, by
fundamentals, were meant such propositions which every
person must necessarily have an explicit knowledge and
belief of, before he can be a Christian.

Mr. B — d, in the same place, p. 6, 7, very truly and
pertinently adds, " That it did not pertain to [my]
" undertaking to inquire what doctrines, either in the
" Epistles, or the Evangelists and the Acts, were of
** greatest moment to be understood by them who are

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 401

" Christians ; but what was necessary to be known and
" believed to a person's being- a Christian. For there
" are many important doctrines, both in the Gospels,
" and in the Acts, besides this, * Thai Jesus is the
" ' Messiah/ But how many soever the doctrines be,
" which are taught in the epistles, if there be no doc-
" trine besides this, * That Jesus is the Messiah,'
" taught there as necessary to be believed to make a
" man a Christian ; all the doctrines taught there will
(: not make any thing against what this author has as-
" serted, nor against the method he hath observed ;
" especially, considering we have an account, in the
" Acts of the apostles, of what those persons, by whom
" the epistles were writ, did teach, as necessary to be
" believed to people's being Christians."

This, and what Mr. B — d subjoins, " That it was not
" my design to give an abstract of any of the inspired
" books," is so true, and has so clear reason in it, that
any, but this writer, would have thought himself con
cerned to have answered something to it.

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

It not being, it seems, a creed- maker's business to
convince men's understanding by reason ; but to im
pose on their belief by authority ; or, where that is
wanting, by falsehood and bawling. And to such Mr.
Bold observes well, p. 8, " That if I had given the like
" account of the epistles, that would have been as little
" satisfactory as what I have done already, to those who
" are resolved not to distinguish * betwixt what is ne-
" ' cessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, and
" ' those articles which are to be believed by those who
" ' are Christians,' as they can attain to know that Christ
" hath taught them."

This distinction the creed-maker, no-where that I
remember, takes any notice of : unless it be p. 255,
where he has something relating hereunto, which we
shall consider, when we come to that place. I shall
now go on to show what Mr. Bold has said, to which he
answers not.

Mr. BOLD farther tells him, p. 10, that if he will
prove any thing in opposition to the Reasonableness of

2 D

402 A Second Vindication of the

Christianity, &c. it must be this : " That Jesus Christ
" and his apostles have taught, that the belief of some
" one article, or certain number of articles distinct from
" this, ' That Jesus is the Messiah/ either as exclusive
" of, or in conjunction with, the belief of this article,
" doth constitute and make a person a Christian : but
" that the belief of this, that Jesus is the Messiah alone,
" doth not make a man a Christian."

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards IRREFRAGABLY AN
SWERS NOTHING.

Mr. BOLD also, p. 10, charges him with his falsely
accusing me in these words : " He pretends to contend
" for one single article, with the exclusion of all the rest,
" for this reason ; because all men ought to understand
" their religion." And again, where he says,, I am at
this, viz. " That we must not have any point of doctrine
" in our religion, that the mob doth not, at the very
" first naming of it, perfectly understand and agree
" to : " Mr. Bold has quoted my express words to the
contrary.

BUT TO THIS this unanswerable gentleman AN
SWERS NOTHING.

But if he be such a mighty disputant, that nothing
can stand in his way ; I shall expect his direct answer to
it among those other propositions which I have set down
to his score, and I require him to prove, if he can.

The creed-maker spends above four pages of his Re
flections, in a great stir who is the author of those ani
madversions he is reflecting on. To which I tell him,
it matters not to a lover of truth, or a confuter of errours,
who was the author; but what they contain. He who
makes such a deal to do about that which is nothing to
the question, shows he has but little mind to the argu
ment ; that his hopes are more in the recommendation
of names, and prejudice of parties, than in the strength
of his reasons, and the goodness of his cause. A lover
of truth follows that, whoever be for or against it ; and
can suffer himself to pass by no argument of his adver
sary, without taking notice of it, either in allowing its
force, or giving it a fair answer. Were the creed-
maker capable of giving such an evidence as this of his

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 403

love of truth, he would not have passed over the twenty
first pages of Mr. Bold's Animadversions in silence.
The falsehoods that are therein charged upon him, would
have required an answer of him, if he could have given
any ; and I tell him, he must give an answer, or con
fess the falsehoods.

In his 255th page, he comes to take notice of these
words of Mr. Bold, in the 21st page of his Animadver
sions, viz. " That a convert to Christianity, or a chris-
* tian, must necessarily believe as many articles as he
" shall attain to know, that Christ Jesus hath taught."
" Which, says the creed-maker, wholly invalidates what
" he had said before, in these words," viz. " That Jesus
" Christ and his apostles did not teach any thing as
' necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian,
' but only this one proposition, That Jesus of Nazareth
" was the Messiah." The reason he gives to show that
the former of these propositions (in Mr. Bold) invali
dates the latter, and that the animadverter contradicts
himself, stands thus : " For, says he, if a Christian must
" give assent to all the articles taught by our Saviour
" in the gospel, and that necessarily ; then all those
" propositions reckoned up in my late discourse, being
" taught by Christ, or his apostles, are necessary to be
" believed." Ans. And what, I beseech you, becomes
of the rest of the propositions taught by Christ, or his
apostles, which you have not reckoned up in your late
discourse? Are not they necessary to be believed, " if
" a Christian must give an assent to ALL the articles
" taught by our Saviour and his apostles ? "

Sir, if you will argue right from that antecedent, it
must stand thus : " If a Christian must give an assent to
" ALL the articles taught by our Saviour and his apo-
" sties, and that necessarily ; " then all the propositions
in the New Testament, taught by Christ, or his apostles^
are necessary to be believed. This consequence I grant
to be true, and necessarily to follow from that antece
dent, and pray make your best of it : but withal re
member, that it puts an utter end to your select number
of fundamentals, and makes all the truths delivered in

2 D 2

404 A Second Vindication of the

the New Testament necessary to be explicitly believed
by every Christian.

But, sir, I must take notice to you, that if it be un
certain, whether he that writ the Animadversions, be
the same person that preached the sermon, yet it is very
visible, that it is the very same person that reflects on
both ; because he here again uses the same trick, in an
swering in the Animadversions the same thing that had
been said in the sermon, viz. by pretending to argue from
words as Mr. Bold's, when Mr. Bold has said no such
thing. The proposition you argue from here is this :
(( If a Christian must give his assent to all the articles
" taught by our Saviour, and that necessarily." But
Mr. Bold says no such thing. His words, as set down
by yourself, are : " A Christian must necessarily believe
" as many articles as he shall attain to know that Christ
" Jesus hath taught." And is there no difference be
tween " ALL that Christ Jesus hath taught," and " AS
" MANY as any one shall attain to know that Christ
" Jesus hath taught ? " There is so great a difference
between these two, that one can scarce think even such
a creed-maker could mistake it. For one of them ad
mits all those to be Christians, who, taking Jesus for the
Messiah, their Lord and King, sincerely apply themselves
to understand and obey his doctrine and law, and to believe
all that they understand to be taught by him : the other
shuts out, if not all mankind, yet nine hundred ninety-
nine of a thousand, of those who profess themselves
Christians, from being really so. For he speaks within
compass, who says there is not one of a thousand, if
there be any one man at all, who explicitly knows and
believes all that our Saviour and his apostles taught, i. e.
all that is delivered in the New Testament, in the true
sense that it is there intended. For if giving assent to
it, in any sense, will serve the turn, our creed-maker can
have no exception against socinians, papists, lutherans,
or any other, who, acknowledging the scripture to be
the word of God, do yet oppose his system.

But the creed-maker goes on, p. 255, and endeavours
to prove that what is necessary to be believed by every

Reasonableness of Christianity 9 <$c. 405

Christian, is necessary to be believed to make a man a
Christian, in these words : " But he will say, the belief
" of those propositions makes not a man a Christian.
" Then, I say, they are not necessary and indispensable ;
" for what is absolutely necessary in Christianity, is
" absolutely requisite to make a man a Christian."

Ignorance, or something worse, makes our creed-
maker always speak doubtfully or obscurely, whenever
he pretends to argue ; for here " absolutely necessary
" in Christianity," either signifies nothing, but absolutely
necessary to make a man a Christian ; and then it is
proving the same proposition, by the same proposition :
or else has a very obscure and doubtful signification.
For, if I ask him, Whether it be absolutely necessary in
Christianity, to obey every one of our Saviour's com
mands, What will he answer me ? If he answers, No ;
I ask him, Which of our Saviour's commands is it not,
in Christianity, absolutely necessary to obey ? If he an
swers, YES ; then I tell him, by this rule, there are no
Christians : because there is no one that does in all things
obey all our Saviour's commands, and therein fails to
perform what is absolutely necessary in Christianity; and
so, by his rule, is no Christian. If he answers, Sincere
endeavour to obey, is all that is absolutely necessary ;
I reply, And so sincere endeavour to understand, is all
that is absolutely necessary : neither perfect obedience,
nor perfect understanding, is absolutely necessary in
Christianity.

But his proposition, being put in terms clear, and not
loose and fallacious, should stand thus, viz. " What is
" absolutely necessary to every Christian, is absolutely
" requisite to make a man a Christian." But then I
deny, that he can infer from Mr. Bold's words, that
those propositions (i. e. which he has set down as funda
mental, or necessary to be believed) are absolutely ne
cessary to be believed by every Christian. For that in
dispensable necessity Mr. Bold speaks of, is not abso
lute, but conditional. His words are, " A Christian
" must believe as many articles, as he shall attain to
" know that Jesus Christ hath taught." So that he
places the indispensable necessity of believing, upon the

406 A Second Vindication of the

condition of attaining to know that Christ taught so. An
endeavour to know what Jesus Christ taught, Mr. B — d
says truly, is absolutely necessary to every one who is a
Christian : and to believe what he has attained to know
that Jesus Christ taught, that also, he says, is absolutely
necessary to every Christian. But all this granted, (as
true it is,) it still remains (and eternally will remain)
to be proved from this, (which is all that Mr. Bold says,)
that something else is absolutely required to make a
man a Christian, besides the unfeigned taking Jesus to
be the Messiah, his King and Lord ; and accordingly,
a sincere resolution to obey and believe all that he
commanded and taught.

The gaoler. Acts xvi. 30, in answer to his question,
" What he should do to be saved ? " was answered,
" That he should believe in the Lord Jesus Christ."
And the text says, that the gaoler " took them the
" same hour of the night and washed their stripes, and
" was baptized, he and all his, straightway." Now, I
will ask our creed-maker, whether St. Paul, in speaking
to him the word of the Lord, proposed and explained
to him all those propositions, and fundamental heads of
doctrine, which our creed-maker has set down as neces
sary to be believed to make a man a Christian ? Let it
be considered the gaoler was a heathen, and one that
seems to have no more sense of religion or humanity,
than those of that calling use to have : for he had let
them alone under the pain of their stripes, without any
remedy j or so much as the ease of washing them, from
the day before, until after his conversion ; which was
not until after midnight. And can any one think, that
between his asking what he should do to be saved, and
his being baptized, which, the text says, was the same
hour, and straightway ; there was time enough for St.
Paul and Silas, to explain to him all the creed-maker's
articles, and make such a man as that, and all his
house, understand the creed-maker's whole system ;
especially, since we hear nothing of it in the conversion
of these, or any others, who were brought into the faith,
in the whole history of the preaching of our Saviour and
the apostles ? Now let me ask the creed-maker, whether

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 407

the gaoler was not a Christian, when he was baptized ;
and whether, if he had then immediately died, he had
not been saved, without the belief of any one article
more, than what Paul and Silas had then taught him ?
Whence it follows, that what was then proposed to him
to be believed, (which appears to be nothing, but that
Jesus was the Messiah,) was all that was absolutely ne
cessary to be believed to make him a Christian : though
this hinders not, but that afterwards it might be ne
cessary for him, indispensably necessary, to believe
other articles, when he attained to the knowledge that
Christ had taught them. And the reason of it is plain :
because the knowing that Christ hath taught any
thing, and the not receiving it for true (which is
believing it,) is inconsistent with the believing him
to be the Messiah, sent from God to enlighten and
save the world. Every word of divine revelation is
absolutely and indispensably necessary to be believed
by every Christian, as soon as he comes to know it
to be taught by our Saviour, or his apostles, or to be
of divine revelation. But yet this is far enough from
making it absolutely necessary to every Christian, to
know every text in the scripture, much less to under
stand every text in the scripture ; and least of all, to
understand it as the creed-maker is pleased to put his
sense upon it.

This the good creed-maker either will not, or cannot
understand ; but gives us a list of articles culled out of
the scripture by his own authority, and tells us, those
are absolutely necessary to be believed by every one, to
make him a Christian. For what is of absolute neces
sity in Christianity, as those, he says, are, he tells us, is
absolutely requisite to make a man a Christian. But
when he is asked, Whether these are all the articles of
absolute necessity to be believed to make a man a Chris
tian ? this worthy divine, that takes upon himself to be
a successor of the apostles, cannot tell. And yet, having
taken upon himself also to be a creed-maker, he must
suffer himself to be called upon for it again and again,
until he tells us what is of absolute necessity to be believed
to make a man a Christian, or confess that he cannot.

408 A Second Vindication of the

In the mean time, I take the liberty to say, that every
proposition delivered in the New Testament by our Sa
viour, or his apostles, and so received by any Christian as
of divine revelation, is of as absolute necessity to be as
sented to by him, in the sense he understands it to be
taught by them, as any one of those propositions enume
rated by the creed-maker : and if he thinks otherwise I
shall desire him to prove it. The reason whereof is this,
that in divine revelation, the ground of faith being the
only authority of the proposer : where that is the same,
there is no difference in the obligation or measure of be
lieving. Whatever the Messiah, that came from God,
taught, is equally to be believed by every one who re
ceives him as the Messiah, as soon as he understands what
it was he taught. There is no such thing as garbling his
doctrine, and making one part of it more necessary to be
believed than another, when it is understood. His saying
is, and must be, of unquestionable authority to all that
receive him as their heavenly King; and carries with it an
equal obligation of assent to all that he says as true. But
since nobody can explicitly assent to any proposition of
our Saviour's as true, but in the sense he understands our
Saviour to have spoken it in ; the same authority of the
Messiah, his King, obliges every one absolutely and in
dispensably to believe every part of the New Testament
in that sense he understands it : for else he rejects the
authority of the deliverer, if he refuses his assent to it in
that sense which he is persuaded it was delivered in. But
the taking him for the Messiah, his King and Lord, lay
ing upon every one who is his subject, an obligation to
endeavour to know his will in all things ; every true
Christian is under an absolute and indispensable neces
sity, by being his subject, to study the scriptures with an
unprejudiced mind, according to that measure of time,
opportunity, and helps, which he has ; that in these sa
cred writings, he may find what his Lord and Master
hath by himself, or by the mouths of his apostles, re
quired of him, either to be believed or done.

The creed-maker, in the following page, 256, hath
these words : " It is worth the reader's observing, that
** notwithstanding I had in twelve pages together (viz.

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 409

" from the eighth to the twentieth) proved, that several
" propositions are necessary to be believed by us, in
" order to our being Christians ; yet this sham-animad-
" verter attends not to any one of the particulars which
" I had mentioned, nor offers any thing against them ;
" but only, in a lumping way, dooms them all in those
" magisterial words : " I do not see any proof he pro-
" duces," p. 21. This is his wonderful way of con-
" futing me, by pretending that he cannot see any
" proof in what I allege : and all the world must be led
" by his eyes."

Answ. " It is worth the reader's observing," that
the creed-maker does not reply to what Mr. Bold has
said to him, as we have already seen, and shall see more
as we go on ; and therefore he has little reason to com
plain of him, for not having answered enough. Mr.
Bold did well to leave that which was an insignificant
lump, so as it was, together ; for it is no wonderful
thing not to see any proof, where there is no proof.
There is indeed, in those pages the creed-maker men
tions, much confidence, much assertion, a great many
questions asked, and a great deal said after his fashion :
but for a proof, I deny there is any one. And if what
I have said in another place already, does not con
vince him of it, I challenge him, with all his eyes, and
those of the world to boot, to find out, in those twelve
renowned pages, one proof. Let him set down the
proposition, and his proof of its being absolutely and
indispensably necessary to be believed to make a man
a Christian ; and I too will join with him in his testi
monial of himself, that he is irrefragable. But I must
tell him before-hand, talking a great deal loosely will
not do it.

Mr. Bold and I say we cannot see any proof in those
twelve pages : the way to make us see, or to convince
the world that we are blind, is to single out one proof
out of that wood of words there, which you seem to
take for arguments, and set it down in a syllogism,
which is the fair trial of a proof or no proof. You
have, indeed, a syllogism in the 23d page ; but that
is not in those twelve pages you mention. Besides, I

410 A Second Vindication of the

have showed in another place, what that proves; to
which I refer you.

In answer to the creed-maker's question, about his
other fundamentals found in the epistles : " Why did
" the apostles write these doctrines ? Was it not, that
" those they writ to, might give their assent to them ?"
Mr. Bold. p. 22, replies : " But then it may be asked
" again, Were not those persons Christians to whom the
" apostles writ these doctrines, and whom they required
" to assent to them ? Yes, verily. And if so, What
" was it that made them Christians before their assent
" to these doctrines was required? If it were any thing
" besides their believing Jesus to be the Messiah, it
" ought to be instanced in, and made out."

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

The next thing in controversy between Mr. Bold and
the creed-maker, (for I follow Mr. B — d's order,) is
about a matter of fact, viz. Whether the creed-maker
has proved, " that Jesus Christ and his apostles have
" taught, that no man can be a Christian, or shall be
" saved, unless he has an explicit knowledge of all
" those things, which have an immediate respect to
" the occasion, author, way, means, and issue of our
" salvation, and which are necessary for the knowing
" the true nature and design of it ? " This, Mr. Bold,
p. 24, tells him, " he has not done/' To this the creed-
maker replies, p. 258.

" And yet the reader may satisfy himself, that this is
" the very thing that I had been proving just before,
" and, indeed, all along in the foregoing chapter/'
Answ. There have been those who have been seven
years proving a thing, which at last they could not do ;
and I give you seven years to prove this proposition,
which you should there have proved ; and I must add
to your score here, viz.

LII. That Jesus Christ, or his apostles, have taught,
that no man can be a Christian, or can be saved,
unless he hath an explicit knowledge of all these
things which have an immediate respect to the occa
sion, author, way, means, and issue of our salvation,

Reasonableness of Christianity, S$c. 411

and which are necessary for our knowing the true
nature and design of it.

Nor must the poor excuse, of saying, it was not
necessary " to add any farther medium, and proceed
" to another syllogism, because you had secured that
" proposition before;" go for payment. If you had
secured it, as you say, it had been quite as easy, arid
much for your credit, to have produced the proof
whereby you had secured it, than to say you had done
it; and thereupon to reproach Mr. Bold with heed-
lessness ; and to tell the world, that " he cares not
" what he saith." The rule of fair dispute is, indis-
" pensably to prove, where any thing is denied. To
evade this is shuffling : and he that, instead of it, an
swers with ill language, in my country, is called a foul-
mouthed wrangler.

To the creed-maker's exception to my demand, about
the actual belief of all his fundamentals in his new
creed, Mr. Bold asks, p. 24, " Whether a man can be-
" lieve particular propositions, and not actually believe
" them?"

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

Mr. Bold, p. 25, farther acknowledges the creed-
maker's fundamental propositions to " be in the bible ;
" and that they are for this purpose there, that they
" might be believed :" and so, he saith, " is every other
" proposition which is taught in our bibles." But asks,
" How will it thence follow, that no man can be a
" Christian, until he particularly know, and actually as-
" sent to every proposition in our bibles ?'*

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

From p. 26 to 30, Mr. Bold shows, that the creed-
maker's reply concerning my not gathering of funda
mentals out of the epistles is nothing to the purpose :
and this he demonstratively proves.

AND TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

The creed-maker had falsely said, That " I bring no
" tidings of an evangelical faith ; " and thence very
readily and charitably infers : " Which gives us to
w understand, that he verily believes there is no such

412 A Second Vindication of the

" Christian faith." To this Mr. Bold thus softly re-
plies, p. 31, "I think Mr. Edwards is much mistaken,
" both in his assertion and inference : " and to show-
that he could not so infer, adds : " If the author of
" the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. had not
" brought any tidings of such a faith, I think it could
" not be thence justly inferred, that he verily believes
" there is no such Christian faith : because his inquiry
" and search was not concerning Christian faith, con-
" sidered subjectively but objectively ; what the articles
" be, which must be believed to make a man a chris-
" tian ; and not, with what sort of faith these articles
" are to be believed."

To this the creed-maker answers indeed : but it is
something as much worse than nothing, as falsehood is
worse than silence. His words are, p. 258, " It may
" be questioned, from what he [the animadverter] hath
" the confidence to say, p. 31, viz. There is no in-
" quiry in the Reasonableness of Christianity, con-
" cerning faith subjectively considered, but only ob-
" jectively," &c. And thus having set down Mr.
B — d's words, otherwise than they are ; for Mr. Bold
does not say, there is no inquiry, i. e. no mention, (for
so the creed-maker explains inquiries here. For to
convince Mr. Bold that there is an inquiry, i. e. men
tion, of subjective faith, he alleges, that subjective
faith is spoken of in the 296th and 297th pages of my
book.) But Mr. Bold says not, that faith, considered
subjectively, is not spoken of any-where in the Rea
sonableness of Christianity, &c. but " that the au-
" thor's inquiry and search (i. e. the author's search, or
" design of his search) was not concerning Christian
" faith considered subjectively." And thus the creed-
maker, imposing on his reader, by perverting Mr. Bold's
sense, from what was the intention of my inquiry and
search, to what I had said in it, he goes on, after his
scurrilous fashion, to insult, in these words which follow:
" I say it may be guessed from this, what a liberty this
" writer takes, to assert what he pleases." Answ. " To
" assert what one pleases/* without truth and without
certainty, is the worst character can be given a writer ;

Reasonableness of Christianity, $$c. 413

and with falsehood to charge it another, is no mean
slander and injury to a man's neighbour. And yet to
these shameful arts must he be driven, who finding his
strength of managing a cause to lie only in fiction and
falsehood, has no other but the dull Billingsgate way of
covering it, by endeavouring to divert the reader's ob
servation and censure from himself, by a confident re
peated imputation of that to his adversary, which he
himself is so frequent in the commission of. And of
this the instances I have given, are a sufficient proof;
in which I have been at the pains to set down the words
on both sides, and the pages where they are to be found,
for the reader's full satisfaction.

The cause in debate between us is of great weight,
and concerns every Christian. That any evidence in the
proposal, or defence of it, can be sufficient to conquer
all men's prejudices, is vanity to imagine. But this, I
think, I may justly demand of every reader, that since
there are great and visible falsehoods on one side or the
other, (for the accusations of this kind are positive and
frequent,) he would examine on which side they are :
and upon that I will venture the cause in my reader's
judgment, who will but be at the pains of turning to the
pages marked out to him ; and as for him that will not
do that, I care not much what he says.

The creed-maker's following words, p. 258, have
the natural mark of their author. They are these :
" How can this animadverter come off with peremp-
" torily declaring, that subjective faith is not inquired
" into, in the treatise of the Reasonableness of chris-
" tianity, &c. when in another place, p. 35, and 36,
" he avers, That Christian faith and Christianity, con-
" sidered subjectively, are the same?" Answ. In which
words there are two manifest untruths : the one is,
" That Mr. Bold peremptorily declares, that subjec-
" live faith is not inquired into, i. e. spoken of, in the
" Reasonableness of Christianity," &c. Whereas Mr.
Bold says in that place, p. 31, " If he, [i. e. the au-
" thor,] had not said one word concerning faith sub-
" jectively considered." The creed-maker's other un
truth is his saying, " That the animadverter avers,

414 A Second Vindication of the

" p. 35, 36,, that Christian faith and Christianity, consi-
" dered subjective!}', are the same." Whereas it is evi
dent, that Mr. Bold, arguing against these words of the
creed-maker (" The belief of Jesus being the Messiah,
" was one of the first and leading acts of Christian
" faith/*) speaks in that place of an act of faith, as
these words of his demonstrate : " Now, I appre-
" hend that Christian faith and Christianity, considered
" subjectively, (and an ACT of Christian faith, I think,
" cannot be understood in any other sense,) are the
" very same." I must therefore desire him to set down
the words wherein the animadverter peremptorily de
clares,

LIIL That subjective faith is not inquired into, or
spoken of, in the treatise of the Reasonableness of
Christianity, &c.

And next, to produce the words wherein the animad
verter avers,

LIV. That Christian faith and Christianity, considered
subjectively, are the same.

To the creed-maker's saying, " That the author of
" the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. brings us no
" tidings of evangelical faith belonging to Christianity,"
Mr. Bold replies : That I have done it in all those
pages where I speak of taking and accepting Jesus to
be our King and Ruler ; and particularly he sets down
my words out of pages 119, &c.

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

The creed-maker says, p. 59, of his Socinianism un
masked, that the author of the Reasonableness of Chris
tianity " tells men again and again, that a Christian
" man, or member of Christ,, needs not know or be-
" lieve any more than that one individual point." To
which Mr. Bold thus replies, p. 33, " If any man will
" show me those words in any part of the Reasonable-
" ness, &c. I shall suspect I was not awake all the
" time I was reading that book: and I am as certain

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 415

" as one awake can be, that there are several passages
" in that book directly contrary to these words. And
" there are some expressions in the Vindication of the
" Reasonableness, &c. one would think, if Mr. Edwards
" had observed them, they would have prevented that
" mistake."

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

Mr. Bold, p. 34, takes notice, that the creed-maker
had not put the query, or objection, right, which, he
says, " Some, and not without some show of ground,
" may be apt to start ; and therefore Mr. Bold puts the
" query right, viz. ' Why did Jesus Christ and his
" ' apostles require assent to, and belief of, this one ar-
" ' tide alone, viz. That Jesus is the Messiah, to consti-
" ' tute and make a man a Christian, or true member of
" e Christ, (as it is abundantly evident they did, from the
" ' Reasonableness of Christianity,) if the belief of more
" ' articles is absolutely necessary to make and con-
" * stitute a man a Christian?"

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

And therefore I put the objection, or query, to him
again in Mr. Bold's words, and expect an answer to it,
viz.

LV. Why did Jesus Christ, and his apostles, require
assent to, and belief of, this one article alone, viz.
That Jesus is the Messiah, to make a man a
Christian, (as it is abundantly evident they did,
from all their preaching, recorded throughout all
the whole history of the Evangelists and the Acts,)
if the belief of more articles be absolutely neces
sary to make a man a Christian ?

The creed -maker having made believing Jesus to be
the Messiah, only one of the first and leading acts of
Christian faith ; Mr. Bold, p. 35, rightly tells him,
That " Christian faith must be the belief of something
" or other : and if it be the belief of any thing besides
" this, that Jesus is the Christ, or Messiah, that other
" thing should be specified ; and it should be made ap-
" pear, that the belief that Jesus is the Messiah, without

416 A Second Vindication of the

" the belief of that other proposition^ not Christian faith."
BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

Mr. B — d, in the four following pages, 36 — 39, has
excellently explained the difference between that faith
which constitutes a man a Christian, and that faith
whereby one that is a Christian, believes the doctrines
taught by our Saviour ; and the ground of that differ
ence: and therein has fully overturned this proposition,
" That believing Jesus to be the Messiah, is but a step,
" or the first step to Christianity."

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

To the creed-maker's supposing that other matters of
faith were proposed with this, that Jesus is the Messiah ;
Mr. Bold replies, That this should be proved, viz. that
other articles were proposed, as requisite to be believed
to make men Christians. And, p. 40, he gives a reason
why he is of another mind, viz. " Because there is no-
" thing but this recorded, which was insisted on for that
" purpose."

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

Mr. Bold, p. 42, shows that Rom. x. 9, which the
creed-maker brought against it, confirms the assertion
of the author of the Reasonableness, &;c. concerning the
faith that makes a man a Christian.

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

The creed-maker says, p. 78, " This is the main an-
" swer to the objection, (or query above proposed,) viz.
'•' That Christianity was erected by degrees." This
Mr. Bold, p. 43, proves to be nothing to the purpose, by
this reason, viz. " Because what makes one man a chris-
" tian, or ever did make any man a Christian, will at any
" time, to the end of the world, make another man a
" Christian:" and asks, " Will not that make a Christian
" now, which made the apostles themselves Christians?"

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.
In answer to his sixth chapter, Mr. Bold, p. 45, tells
him, " It was not my business to discourse of the
" Trinity, or any other particular doctrines, proposed
" to be believed by them who are Christians ; and that
" it is no fair and just ground to accuse a man, with
" rejecting the doctrines of the Trinity, and that Jesus

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 417

" is God, because he does not interpret some particu-
" lar texts to the same purpose others do."

BUT TO THIS Mr. Edwards ANSWERS NOT.

Indeed he takes notice of these words of Mr. Bold,
in this paragraph, viz. " Hence Mr. Edwards takes oc-
" casion to write many pages about these terms [viz.
" Messiah and Son of God] ; but I do not perceive that
" he pretends to offer any proof, that these were not
" synonymous terms amongst the jews at that time,
" which is the point he should have proved, if he de-
" signed to invalidate what this author says about that
" matter." To this the creed maker replies, p. 257,
" The animadverter doth not so much as offer one
" syllable to disprove what I delivered, and closely
" urged on that head." Answ. What need any answer
to disprove where there is no proof brought that reaches
the proposition in question ? If there had been any such
proof, the producing of it, in short, had been a more
convincing argument to the reader, than so much brag
ging of what has been done. For here are more words
spent, (for I have not set them all down,) than would
have served to have expressed the proof of this propo
sition, viz. that the terms above mentioned were not
synonymous among the jews, if there had been any
proof of it. But having already examined what the
creed-maker brags he has closely urged, I shall say no
more of it here.

To the creed-maker's making me a socinian, in his
eighth chapter, for not naming Christ's satisfaction
among the advantages and benefits of Christ's coming
into the world; Mr. Bold replies, " 1. That it is no
" proof, because I promised not to name every one of
" them. And the mention of some is no denial of
" others." 2. He replies, That, " satisfaction is not
" so strictly to be termed an advantage, as the effects
" and fruits of it are ; and that the doctrine of satisfac-
" tion instructs us the way how Christ did, by divine
" appointment, obtain those advantages for us." And
this was an answer that deserved some reply from the
creed-maker.

BUT TO THIS HE ANSWERS NOT.
2 E

418 A Second Vindication of the

Mr. Bold says right, that this is a doctrine that is of
mighty importance for a Christian to be well acquainted
with. And I will add to it, that it is very hard for a
Christian, who reads the scripture with attention, and an
unprejudiced mind, to deny the satisfaction of Christ :
but it being a term not used by the Holy Ghost in the
scripture, and very variously explained by those that do
use it, and very much stumbled at by those I was there
speaking to, who were such, as I there say, " Who will.
te not take a blessing, unless they be instructed what
" need they had of it, and why it was bestowed upon
" them ; " I left it with the other disputed doctrines of
Christianity, to be looked into (to see what it was Christ
had taught concerning it) by those who were Christians,
and believed Jesus to be the Saviour promised, and
sent from God. And to those who yet doubted that
he was so, and made 'this objection, " What need was
" there of a Saviour ? " I thought it most reasonable
to offer such particulars only as were agreed on by all
Christians, and were capable of no dispute, but must be
acknowledged by every body to be needful. This,
though the words above quoted out of the Reasonable
ness of Christianity, &c. p. 129, show to be my de
sign ; yet the creed-maker plainly gives me the lye, and
tells me it was not my design. " All the world are
" faithless, false, treacherous, hypocritical strainers
" upon their reason and conscience, dissemblers, jour-
" neymen, mercenary hirelings, except Mr. Edwards :"
I mean all the world that opposes him. And must
not one think he is mightily JDeh olden to the excel
lency and readiness of his own nature, who is no sooner
engaged in controversy, but he immediately finds out
in his adversaries these arts of equivocation, lying, and
effrontery, in managing of it ? Reason and learning,
and acquired improvements, might else have let him
gone on with others, in the dull and ordinary way of
fair arguing ; wherein, possibly, he might have done no
great feats. Must not a rich and fertile soil within,
and a prompt genius, wherein a man may readily spy
the propensities of base and corrupt nature, be acknow
ledged to be an excellent qualification for a disputant,

Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc. 419

to help him to the quick discovery and laying open of
the faults of his opponents; which a mind otherwise
disposed would not so much as suspect ? But Mr. Bold,
without this, could not have been so soon found out to
be a journeyman, a dissembler, an hired mercenary, and
stored with all those good qualities, wherein he hath his
full share with me. But why would he then venture
upon Mr. Edwards, who is so very quick-sighted in
these matters, and knows so well what villainous man
is capable of?

I should not here, in this my Vindication, have given
the reader so much of Mr. Bold's reasoning, which,
though clear and strong, yet has more beauty and force,
as it stands in the whole piece in his book ; nor should I
have so often repeated this remark upon each passage,
viz. "To this Mr. Edwards answers not ;" had it not
been the shortest and properest comment could be made
on that triumphant paragraph of his, which begins in
the 128th page of his Socinian creed; wherein, among
a great deal of no small strutting, are these words : " By
" their profound silence they acknowledge they have
" nothing to reply." He that desires to see more of
the same noble strain, may have recourse to that emi
nent place. Besides, it was fit the reader should have
this one taste more of the creed-maker's genius, who
passing by in silence all these clear and apposite replies
of Mr. Bold, loudly complains of him, p. 259, " That
" where he [Mr. Bold] finds something that he dares
" not object against, he shifts it off." And again, p.
260, " That he does not make any offer at reason ;
" there is not the least shadow of an argument — -As if
" he were only hired to say something against me, [the
" creed-maker,] though not at all to the purpose : and
" truly, any man may discern a MERCENARY stroke all
" along;" with a great deal more to the same purpose.
For such language as this, mixed with scurrility, neither
fit to be spoken by, nor of, a minister of the gospel,
make up the remainder of his postscript. But to pre
vent this for the future ; I demand of him, that if in
either of his treatises, there be any thing against what
I have said, in my Reasonableness of Christianity, which

420 A Second Vindication of the

he thinks not fully answered, he will set down the pro
position in direct words, and note the page of his book
where it is to be found : and I promise him to answer
it. For as for his railing, and other stuff besides the
matter, I shall hereafter no more trouble myself to take
notice of it. And so much for Mr. Edwards.

THERE is another gentleman, and of another sort
of make, parts, and breeding, who, (as it seems,
ashamed of Mr. Edwards's way of handling controver
sies in religion) has had something to say of my " Rea-
" sonableness of Christianity," &c. and so has made it
necessary for me to say a word to him, before I let those
papers go out of my hand. It is the author of " The
" Occasional Paper/' numb. 1. The second, third, and
fourth pages of that paper, gave me great hopes to meet
with a man, who would examine all the mistakes which
came abroad in print, with that temper and indifferency,
that might set an exact pattern for controversy, to those
who would approve themselves to be sincere contenders
for truth and knowledge, and nothing else, in the dis
putes they engaged in. Making him allowance for the
mistakes that self-indulgence is apt to impose upon hu
man frailty, I am apt to believe he thought his perform
ance had been such : but I crave leave to observe,
that good and candid men are often misled, from a fair
unbiassed pursuit of truth, by an over-great zeal for
something, that they, upon wrong grounds, take to be
so ; and that it is not so easy to be a fair and unpreju
diced champion for truth, as some, who profess it, think
it to be. To acquaint him with the occasion of this re
mark, I must desire him to read and consider his nine
teenth page ; and then to tell me,

1. Whether he knows, that the doctrine proposed in
the " Reasonableness of Christianity, &c." was bor
rowed, as he says, from Hobbes's Leviathan ? For I tell
him, I borrowed it only from the writers of the four
Gospels and the Acts ; and did not know those words,
he quoted out of the Leviathan, were there, or any thing
like them. Nor do I know yet, any farther than as I
believe them to be there, from his quotation.

Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c.

2. Whether affirming, as he does positively, this,
which he could not know to be true, and is in itself per
fectly false, were meant to increase or lessen the credit
of the author of the " Reasonableness of Christianity,"
&c. in the opinion of the world ? Or is consonant with
his own rule, p. 3, " of putting candid constructions on
" what adversaries say ? " Or with what follows, in these
words ? " The more divine the cause is, still the greater
" should be the caution. The very discoursing about
" Almighty God, or our holy religion, should compose
" our passions, and inspire us with candour and love.
" It is very indecent to handle such subjects, in a man-
" ner that betrays rancour and spite. These are fiends
" that ought to vanish, and should never mix, either
" with a search after truth, or the defence of religion."

3. Whether the propositions which he has, out of my
book, inserted into his nineteenth page, and says, " are
" consonant to the words of the Leviathan," were
those of all my books, which were likeliest to give the
reader a true and fair notion of the doctrine contained
in it? If they were not, I must desire him to remember
and beware of his fiends. Not but that he will find
those propositions there to be true. But that neither he
nor others may mistake my book, this is that, in short
which it says :

1. That there is a faith that makes men Christians.

2. That this faith is the believing " Jesus of Naza-
" reth to be the Messiah."

3. That the believing Jesus to be the Messiah, in
cludes in it a receiving him for our Lord and King,
promised and sent from God : and so lays upon all his
subjects an absolute and indispensable necessity of as
senting to all that they can attain the knowledge that
he taught ; and of a sincere obedience to all that he
commanded.

This, whether it be the doctrine of the Leviathan, I
know not. This appears to me out of the New Testa
ment, from whence (as I told him in the preface) I took
it, to be the doctrine of our Saviour and his apostles ;
and I would not willingly be mistaken in it. If there
fore there be any other faith besides this, absolutely re-

A Second Vindication of the

quisitc to make a man a Christian, I shall here again de
sire this gentleman to infovm me what it is, i. e. to set
down all those propositions which are so indispensably
to be believed, (for it is of simple believing I perceive
the controversy runs,) that no man can be a believer,
i. e. a Christian, without an actual knowledge of, and an
explicit assent to them. If he shall do this with that
candour and fairness he declares to be necessary in such
matters, I shall own myself obliged to him : for I am in
earnest, and I would not be mistaken in it.

If he shall decline it> I, and the world too, must con
clude, that upon a review of my doctrine, he is con
vinced of the truth of it, and is satisfied, that I am in the
right. For it is impossible to think, that a man of that
fairness and candour, which he solemnly prefaces his dis
course with, should continue to condemn the account I
have given of the faith which I am persuaded makes a
Christian ; and yet he himself will not tell me (when I
earnestly demand it of him, as desirous to be rid of
my errour, if it be one) what is that more, which is ab
solutely required to be believed by every one, before he
can be a believer, i. e. what is indispensably necessary
to be known,, and explicitly believed to make a man a
Christian.

Another thing which I must desire this author to ex
amine, by those his own rules, is, what he says of me,
p. 30, where he makes me to have a prejudice against
the ministry of the gospel, and their office, from what
I have said in my Reasonableness, (Sec. p. 135, 136, con
cerning the priests of the world, in our Saviour's time :
which he calls bitter reflections.

If he will tell me what is so bitter, in any one of
those passages which he has set down, that is not true, or
ought not to be said there, and give me the reason why
he is offended at it ; I promise him to make what repara
tion he shall think fit, to the memory of those priests
whom he, with so much good nature, patronizes, near
seventeen hundred years after they had been out of the
world ; and is so tenderly concerned for their reputa
tion, that he exccpts against that, as said against them,
which was not. For one of the three places he sets down,

Reasonableness of Christianity) S^c. 423

was not spoken of priests. But his making my mention
ing the faults of the priests of old, in our Saviour's time,
to be an " exposing the office of the ministers of the
" gospel now, and a vilifying those who are employed in
" it ;" I must desire him to examine, by his own rules of
love and candour ; and to tell me, " Whether I have not
" reason, here again, to mind him of his FIENDS, and
" to advise him to beware of them?" And to show him
how I think I have, I crave leave to ask him these
questions :

1. Whether I do not all along plainly, and in express
words, speak of the priests of the world, preceding, and
in our Saviour's time ? Nor can my argument bear any
other sense.

2. Whether all I have said of them be not true ?

3. Whether the representing truly the carriage of the
Jewish, and more especially of the heathen priests, in
our Saviour's time, as my argument required, can ex
pose the office of the ministers of the gospel now ? Or
ought to have such an interpretation put upon it ?

4. Whether what he says of the " air and language I.
" use, reaching farther," carry any thing else in it, but
a declaration, that he thinks some men's carriage now,
had some affinity with what I have truly said, of the
priests of the world, before Christianity ; and that there
fore the faults of those should have been let alone, or
touched more gently, for fear some should think these
now concerned it ?

5. Whether, in truth, this be not to accuse them,
with a design to draw the envy of it on me ? Whether
out of good will to them, or to me, or both, let him
look. This I am sure, I have spoken of none but the
priests before Christianity, both Jewish and heathen.
And for those of the jews, what our Saviour has pro
nounced of them, justifies my reflections from being
bitter; and that the idolatrous heathen priests were
better than they, I believe our author will not say : and
if he were preaching against them, as opposing the mi
nisters of the gospel, I suppose he will give as ill a
character of them. But if any one extends my words
farther, than to those they were spoke of, I ask

424 A Second Vindication., fyc.

whether that agrees with his rules of love and can
dour ?

I shall impatiently expect from this author of the
occasional paper, an answer to these questions ; and
hope to find them such as becomes that temper, and love
of truth, which he professes. I long to meet with a man,
who, laying aside party, and interest, and prejudice, ap
pears in controversy so as to make good the character of
a champion of truth for truth's sake ; a character not so
hard to be known whom it belongs to, as to be deserved.
Whoever is truly such an one, his opposition to me will
be an obligation. For he that proposes to himself the
convincing me of an errour, only for truth's sake, can
not, I know, mix any rancour, or spite, or ill-will, with
it. He will keep himself at a distance from those
FIENDS, and be as ready to hear, as offer reason. And
two so disposed can hardly miss truth between them, in
a fair inquiry after it ; at least they will not lose good-
breeding, and especially charity, a virtue much more ne
cessary than the attaining of the knowledge of obscure
truths, that are not easy to be found; and probably,
therefore, not necessary to be known.

The unbiassed design of the writer, purely to defend
and propagate truth, seems to me to be that alone which
legitimates controversies. I am sure it plainly distin
guishes such from all others, in their success and useful
ness. If a man, as a sincere friend to the person, and to
the truth, labours to bring another out of errour, there
can be nothing more beautiful, nor more beneficial. If
party, passion, or vanity direct his pen, and have a hand
in the controversy ; there can be nothing more unbe
coming, more prejudicial, nor more odious. What
thoughts I shall have of a man that shall, as a Christian,
go about to inform me what is necessary to be believed
to make a man a Christian, I have declared, in the pre
face to my " Reasonableness of Christianity," &c. nor do
I find myself yet altered. He that, in print, finds fault
with my imperfect discovery of that, wherein the faith,
which makes a man a Christian, consists, and will not
tell me what more is required, will do well to satisfy the
world what they ought to think of him.

INDEX.

A.

ABRIDGMENT of faith, what
it is, 275

Acts of the apostles, book so
called, the author did not
charge his readers against stir
ring beyond it, 24-8

— how wisely as well as faith
fully written by St. Luke, 328,
329

Actual assent to fundamental ar
ticles, how necessary, 223, 224

Adam, wrong notions concern
ing his fall, 4, 5, &c.

• what he fell from, ibid.

Allegations between contending
parties, to be esteemed false
until proved, 192

Apostles, the wisdom of the Lord
in choosing such mean per
sons, 83

< their minds illuminated

by the Holy Spirit, 92, &c.

Article of faith, how the author

pleaded for one only, 174,

196

Articles of Christianity, and such
as are necessary to make a
man a Christian, different, 352

— — — of religion, have been
several hundreds of years ex

plaining, and not yet under
stood, 177
Atheism, want of seriousness in
discoursing of divine things
may occasion it, 304

• • how falsely " The Rea

sonableness of Christianity" is
charged with promoting it, 305

Author of" The Reasonableness
of Christianity"falsely charged
with making one article ne
cessary in formal words, 194

• falsely accused of deny
ing some articles of Christian
ity, 197

. falsely charged with new

modelling the apostles creed,

201

• the several articles made
necessary by him, 202, &c.

falsely charged with say
ing " all things in Christianity
" must be level to every un-
" demanding," 205, ,214, &c.

requires proof of his

making all but one article use
less to make a man a Christian,

205, &c.

— denies his contending for
but one, that men may under
stand their religion, 205,
214

INDEX.

Author not guilty of folly in re
quiring from his opponent a
complete list of fundamentals,
215—222

— ' his opponent compared
to a judge unwilling to hear
both sides, 243

• not justly called a soci-

nian for omitting what is not

expressed in the apostles creed,

281

his faith unjustly repre
sented as little different from
that of a Turk, 282,283

— his account of faith very
different from that of devils,

283—285

. • unjustly charged with

patronizing ignorance, 293

. his adversary's arguing

from one to none would equally

serve a pagan, 305

• how he proves himself a
Christian, 359

• sometimes represented a
socinian, sometimes a papist,
&c. 360

• why he omitted several

passages in the Evangelists, 361

• • should be judged of by

what he says, and not the con
trary, 398, &c.

B.

BELIEF, what it is to believe in

our Saviour, and in his name,

17,&c.

it is necessary to believe

every thing known to be re
vealed in scripture, 156
— — what must be believed
explicitly, and what implicitly,
227, &c.

— we must believe the
manner of things, when re
vealed, 239
Bold, (Mr.) the author's letter of
thanks to him, 185

— vindicated from contradict
ing himself, 389, 391,394)

Bold, (Mr.) his opponent's scur
rilous reflections on him, 395,
&c.

— how falsely his words are
cited, 4-12

— — — several remarkable passages

in him not answered, 409,

410, &c.

groundlessly charged with

not answering his opposer,
419, &c.

•• why so much of his rea
soning is mentioned by the
author, 419

Book, two ways of making one
unanswerable, 192

Booksellers, stirred up against
our author by his adversary,
378, 379

C.

CHRIST, the meaning of his
answer, (John vi. 70) 56

• why he did not expressly
reveal his Messiahship to his
disciples, 35, &c.

— hisMessiahship more clearly
discovered a little before his
sufferings, 57 — Yet even then
he did not expressly declare it
to the Jewish rulers, 69

— how wisely he answered
his captious enemies, 74

— why he owned himself to
be the Son of God before the
high-priest, 77

— — why he would not expressly
own himself a king before
Pilate, 77, 78

his innocency attested even

by Pilate and Judas, 80, 86

— why he spoke obscurely of
his destroying Jerusalem,
(Matt, xx iv.) 88

— Judas being gone, he spake
more explicitly of his king
dom, 90

— to the last he required of
his disciples only to believe
him to be the Messiah, 96, &c.

INDEX.

Christ expressly applied the pro
mises of the Messiah to himself
after his resurrection, 99, &c.

. much oftener mentioned

his kingly office than any other,
113, &c.

. how he fulfilled the moral

law, 122

• what we may think to be

the state of those who never

heard of him, 132

. the necessity of his coming

to make God known, 135 — To

teach men their duty, 1 38 — To

instruct in the right forms of

divine worship, 147, &c. — To

give sufficient encouragement

to a good life, 148 — And to

assure men of divine assistance,

151

. his deity not understood by

the jews by the phrase '* Son
of God." 370

. the word Christ often used

as a proper name, 374

Christians, what is necessary to
be believed to make men so,
226, cSrc.

• • whether all things of

this sort were revealed in our
Saviour's time, 345, &c.

• • what was sufficient to

make men such in Christ's
time, is so still, 358

• are obliged to believe

all that they find our Saviour
taught, 404

all things necessary to

be believed by them, not ne
cessary to their being such,
405, &c.
why they must believe

whatever they find revealed by-
Christ, 408

Christianity, the fundamental ar
ticles of it easy to be under
stood, 175

Commission of our Lord, was to
convince men of his being the
Messiah, 332

Commission of the apostles, and
of the seventy, of the same
tenour, 335, 336

Covenant, changed, when the

conditions of it are changed,
344

Creed, of the apostles, not new-
modelled by the author, 201
. • contains all things neces
sary to be believed to make a
man a Christian, 277

• the compilers of it may be

charged with socinianism by
the same rule the author is,
272,273
D.

DEFIANCE, what it signifies,

206
of any truth, unjustly

charged on the author, 197,

205

Deists, what is necessary to make

men such, 229

— the " Reasonableness of

" Christianity" written chiefly

for such, 268

Devils, why they cannot be

saved by believing, 102

E.

EDWARDS, Dr. John, com-
plained of, for his charge of
atheism, 161

his accusing the author of

socinianism refuted, 167

his commendation of

himself, 192

his rule for good-breed
ing out of the Mishna, 194

. sometimes represents the

word Messiah as easy, and
sometimes as hard to be un
derstood, 178, 244

. represents fundamentals

both as essential and integral
parts of religion, 245

I. charged with assuming

the power of the pope to him
self, 290

• his harangue for the

atheistical rabble, 300

— — — of his arguing from one
to none, 303—305

— — his reasons of but one ar
ticle, being so often required,
considered, 308, &c.

accused of unfairness in

citations, 391

INDEX.

Edwards, Dr. John, charged
with insisting on what con
cerns not the subject, 409

— — blamed for readiness to
find unknown faults in his op-
posers, 418

Epistles, of the apostles, why
written, and ho\r to be under
stood, 152

• notdesigned toteach funda
mental articles of faith, ibid.

— wisely explain the essentials
of Christianity, 154

the author's notion of them

vindicated, 170, &c.

no contempt cast on them

by him, 249

— passing by any of them, no
argument of despising them,

250, &c.

doctrines necessary and not

necessary hard to be dis
tinguished in them, 258, 259

Evangelists, numerous citations
out of them, ill-termed a te
dious collection, 251, 252

— — though they wrote for
believers, yet relate Christ's
doctrine to unbelievers, 253
no good reason to sup

pose them defective in relating
fundamentals, 316,317

contain all doctrines

necessary to make a man a
Christian, 318, £c.

some things wrote by

them not necessary to make a
man a Christian, 320, &c.

when they made the

greatest omissions, yet they
recorded all things necessary
to Christianity, 323, &c.

— — wisely observe the ge
nuine rules of history, 324

• • fundamental articles

unjustly supposed to be omit
ted by them, 325
to charge them with

such omissions, to accuse them
of unfaithfulness, ibid.

omitted no necessary

article for brevity's sake,
326

Exclusion of some truths, the

author vindicated from it, 197,
206

F.

FACT, common justice makes
allegations of, false until
proved, 192

Faith, what kind of, is required

as the condition of eternal life,

17, &c.

justifying, consists in be
lieving Jesus to be the Mes
siah, 101

— — very acceptable to God,
and why, 129

— consists in relying on the
goodness and faithfulness of
God, ibid.

the fundamental articles of

it, well explained, though not
taught in the epistles, 154

the essentials of it, best

learned from the gospels and
acts, ibid.

the author does not make

only one article of it necessary,
194

other truths useful, beside

the necessary article of it,
227, 228

• but one article of it, not

pleaded for, that religion may

easily be understood, 206, &c.

Faith, a practical one, plainly

taught by the author, 284, &c.

an entire one, believes

every scripture truth, 349,
352

— - how but one article was
taught by the apostles, to make
men Christians, 352, 353

whether all the articles of it

necessary to the being chris-

tians, were discovered in our

Saviour's time, 355

— the author falsely charged

with bringing no tidings of an

evangelical one, 414

Formal words, when charged,

ought to be expressly proved,

194

Fundamental articles (of faith)
where to be found, 215, &c.

INDEX.

Fundamental, whence unreason-
ble contentions arise about
them, 230, 231

— • how the same things

may be so to one and not to
another, 232

— how all truths may be
come so, ibid,
many things not so,

L.

though found in the New Tes
tament, 228
how they must be all

plain to every capacity, 237,
&c.
the mischief of making

more than Christ made, 294-,
&c.
G.

GLORY of God, (Rom. iii. 23,)
what meant by, 110

God, ordinarily works by natural
means, 85

• his image consists partly in
immortality, 106, 108

H.

HOBBES's Leviathan, our au
thor unjustly charged with
borrowing from it, 420

Holy Ghost, why he could not
come until our Saviour's as
cension, 93
I.

I AM, (John xiii. 19,) its mean
ing " I am the Messiah," 89

Jerusalem, why Christ preached
but little there, 35, &c.

Jews, the power of life and death
taken from them before our
Saviour's time, 40

Immortality, the image of God
partly consists in it, 106, 108

Infallible guide, only the Spirit
of God speaking in scripture
so, 337

Infidels, who chiefly hinder their
conversion, 165

— the " Reasonableness of

Christianity" written chiefly
for them, 263

LAW of God, all have sinned
against it, 10

the justice of God vindi
cated in giving so difficult a
one to man, 11

of works, what is meant

by it, 12,13

— is contained in the law of
Moses, 12

of faith, how it differs

from that of works, 12, 13

M.

MANNER, as well as reality of

things, how to be believed,

239, &c.

Messiah, that Jesus is he, the

primary article of Christianity,

17, &c.

• is synonymous with "Son

of God," 21, 172, &c.

• declared by miracles, by

circumlocution and by express
words, 32, 33, 34

why our Saviour so much

concealed his being the Mes
siah, 35

why our Lord expressly

owned himself to the woman
of Samaria, 45

how our Saviour's wis
dom appeared in the gradual
discovery of his being the
Messiah, 37, 81

— — his kingdom called by
the jews, " the world to
come," 88

believing Jesus to be so,

a justifying faith, 101, 102

i the Hebrew word suffi

ciently explained in the New
Testament, 178

that Jesus is the Mes
siah, not hard to be under
stood, though both the words
are Hebrew, 243

Miracles, those of our Saviour
appealed to by him for proving
him the Messiah, 18, 19

INDEX.

Mishna of the jews, a rule of
good breeding taken from it
by Dr. Edwards, 194

Moral la\v, established by the
gospel, 122

how fulfilled and confirm
ed by our Saviour, 12

Morality of the gospel, the most
excellent, 138—140, 143

Mysteries, the author vindicated
from the charge of deriding
them, 378

N.

NAME of Christ, believing in
it signifies his being the Mes
siah, 44

O.

OBEDIENCE, sincere, a ne
cessary condition of the gos
pel, 114-, &c.

Occasional paper, reply to seve
ral things therein, 420

One article, how arguing from
one to none, might be used
by a pagan, 305

Vid. Article, Faith, and Fun
damental.

Orthodoxy, when a pretence to
it is ridiculous, 376

R.

P.

PARABLES, why Christ used
them in speaking of his king
dom, 44

n«f»pj!«r«*, the meaning of this
Greek word, 73

Patrick, bishop, his notion of
Christianity, 179

Paul, the apostle, the general
drift of his preaching, 124

Pilate could not find our Saviour
guilty of treason, though he
was charged with it, 77 — 80

Priest, Jesus never assumed this
character, 113

REASON, the insufficiency of
it without revelation, 135, 157

Redemption, the doctrine of it
founded upon the supposition
of Adam's fall, 4

" what it restores men

to, 9

Resurrection of Christ, the ne
cessity of believing it, 9

. the belief of it put for

believing him to be the Mes
siah, 340

Revelation, the necessity of it,
to direct us to heaven, 135, 157

Righteousness, whence faith is
counted for it, 111, 112

1 what attaining to the

law of righteousness signifies,

235

S.

SATISFACTION of Christ,
why not directly insisted on in
" the Reasonableness of Chris
tianity," 163, 164

the omission of it, no

proof of the author's being a
socinian, 270, &c.

— — it is hard for one who

reads the scripture with atten
tion to deny it, 418

Scriptures, not absolutely neces
sary to know and believe all
things contained therein, 156

• necessary to believe

all which we know to be taught
in them, ibid,

in essentials, speaks to

the meanest capacity, 157, &c.
- we should learn our
religion out of them, 294

the mischief of making

them chime with our previous
notions, 294—297

all things therein ne

cessary to be believed, when

understood, 353, 354

Self-conceitedness, worse than

folly, 384

INDEX.

Soclnianism, " The Reasonable
ness of Christianity" unjustly
charged with it, 162, &c.

Socinians, the author charged
with being one, 359, &c.

Son of God, a man's understand
ing this phrase, as some soci-
nians do, no proof of his being
one, 361, &c.

• signifies the same with

Messiah, 366, &c.

— of God, the confession of
the eunuch (Acts viii.) no
proof to the contrary, 371,&c.

Systems, not hated by the au
thor, who only complains of
the abuse of them, 377

T.

TIBERIUS, the Roman empe
ror, a very jealous prince, 81

Tillotson, (archbishop,) how he
understood the phrase Son of
God, 362

Truths, several useful, yet not
necessary to salvation, 227,&c.

U.

UNITARIANS, Dr. Edvvards's

witty remark upon that word,

200

THE END.

C. Baldwin, Printer,
New Bridge- street, London.

±2

r£^

^g

•>»^

T3

^7

V>

O

/

D

-tf

^x

Jj

h

P3

t-i

»-9 o

§"/